Compare this to cars. Even if the number of cars remains constant, their contribution to the C02 pool grows every day.
So we should avoid increasing cattle population 100x, but we wouldn't want to do that anyway because we'd have nowhere to put them, and I certainly wouldn't support deforestation.
> fortunately if cattle population stays constant, their portion of the atmospheric resident methane will also remain constant
I have the impression (as a person uneducated in this topic) that current levels are already too high, and the world population is only going up.
Is there a way to produce more food with lower emissions or should the main target be a steady population? Or both?
I know some people who started eating insects and stopped planning for kids because of this. Me? I'm just confused.
1. Current consumer habits change.
2. Rapidly developing countries decide not to increase the animal proportion in their diet, which has happened in every single culture so far.