素食是遏止全球暖化最有效的方法 Vegetarian Diet, the Most Effective Way to Stop Global Warming

美國新聞組（原文為英文）
By USA News Group (Originally in English)

不吃肉、騎腳踏車、少消費，就可協助遏止全球暖化
～聯合國「跨政府氣候變遷小組」主席帕卓里博士於2008年元月15日講於巴黎

Don’t eat meat, ride a bike, and be a frugal shopper -- that’s how you can help brake global warming. – Dr. Rajendra K. Pachauri, Chairman, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Paris, January 15, 2008　

有許多眾所周知的方法可以減少二氧化碳的排放，例如：減少石化燃料的使用、使用太陽能或風力等再生能源、開省油的車子或替代能源車、使用省電的電子產品，並切實做到減量、重複使用和回收等。然而，遏止全球暖化最有效的方法就是吃素。

There are numerous ways that are commonly known to reduce carbon dioxide emissions: reducing fossil fuel usage; engaging in renewable energies such as solar or wind power; reducing, reusing and recycling everyday items; driving a fuel-efficient or alternative energy car; using energy-saving electronics, and others. Yet the most powerful way to stop global warming is to adopt a vegetarian diet!

在聯合國「跨政府氣候變遷小組」（IPCC）於元月15日所召開的記者會上，主席帕卓里博士（Dr. Pachauri）提出警告說：「如果人類不即刻採取行動的話，氣候變遷將導致嚴重的後果。」他也明確指出，遏止氣候變遷的方法就是不吃肉，並改成更環保的生活方式。

In a press conference on January 15, held by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the head of the IPCC, Dr. Pachuari warned that if the human race doesn’t act now, “climate change will have serious impacts.” He also clearly stated that the way to halt climate change is to stop eating meat, and make a change to a greener lifestyle.

聯合國於2006年發表的一份關於牲畜與環境的報告指出：「無論是從地方或全球的角度而言，畜牧業都是造成嚴重環境危機前三名最主要的元凶之一。」幾乎有20%的二氧化碳排放來自於畜牧業，這比全世界所有交通工具的總排放量還多！

The United Nations’ report on livestock and the environment published in 2006 revealed that, “The livestock sector emerges as one of the top two or three most significant contributors to the most serious environmental crisis, at every scale from local to global.” Almost a fifth (20 percent) of carbon emissions come from livestock - that’s more emissions than from all of the world’s transportation combined!

工廠化養殖業是破壞環境和排放溫室氣體的主凶，這項事實令許多人跌破眼鏡。

Industrialized animal-based agriculture is “astonishingly” the main cause of environmental destruction and greenhouse gas emissions.

飼養動物作為食物，是產生二氧化碳的最大根源之一，同時也是排放甲烷和一氧化二氮的最大來源。全 球9%的二氧化碳、65%的一氧化二氮及37%的甲烷排放，都是肇因於畜牧業所從事的人為相關活動，其中甲烷（溫室效應為二氧化碳的20倍）和一氧化二氮 （溫室效應為二氧化碳的296倍）兩者都是比二氧化碳更具破壞力的溫室氣體。畜牧業也產生64%的人為氨氣，這種氣體對酸雨的形成難辭其咎。

Raising animals for food is one of the largest sources of carbon dioxide and the single largest source of both methane and nitrous oxide emissions. The livestock sector accounts for 9 percent of carbon dioxide, 65 percent of nitrous oxide and 37 percent of methane produced from human-related activities. Both methane (20 times) and nitrous oxide (296 times) are considerably more potent greenhouse gases than carbon dioxide. Livestock also generates 64 percent of human-related ammonia, which contributes to acid rain.

畜牧業也是破壞、污染土地與水源的最大元凶，目前牲畜養殖就佔用了地球30%的土地，而且有更多的土地與水資源被用於種植牲畜的飼料。負責為聯合國糧農組織撰寫報告書的資深作家史坦菲爾先生（Mr. Steinfeld），在「牲畜長遠的陰影：環境問題與選擇」（Livestock's Long Shadow–Environmental Issues and Options）一文指出：「畜牧業是濫伐森林的元凶…亞馬遜原有的森林中有70%都變成了牧場。」此外，畜牧業更是破壞土地的罪魁禍首，約有20%的牧場用地因過度放牧、密集飼養牲畜與遭受侵蝕，地力被破壞殆盡。畜牧業也消耗並污染了大量的水資源，單是在美國，每年就有數兆加侖的灌溉用水，用來種植牲畜的飼料，約佔美國淡水資源的85%。而牲畜產生的大量排泄物，也令生態系統難以負荷。

It is also a major source of land and water damage and pollution. Livestock currently use 30 percent of the Earth’s land surface, and even more land and water is used to grow the feed for livestock. According to Mr. Steinfeld, the senior author of the Food and Agriculture Organization report, Livestock’s Long Shadow–Environmental Issues and Options, livestock is the “major driver of deforestation … some 70 percent of former forests in the Amazon have been turned over to grazing.” In addition, animal-based agriculture causes land degradation. About 20 percent of pastures are degraded through overgrazing, compaction and erosion. It is also responsible for vast water consumption and pollution. In the USA alone, trillions of gallons of irrigation water is used to grow crops to feed animals annually. This is about 85 percent of the USA’s fresh water resources. Animals also generate excessive amounts of biological waste for the ecosystem to take.

美國畜牧業生產一公斤食物的耗水量

一公斤食物	耗水量 （公升）
牛肉	1,000,000
雞肉	3,500
黃豆	2,000
米	1,912
小麥	900
馬鈴薯	500

Water consumption in generating one kilo of food in US
animal-based agriculture

1 kg of meat	Water (liter)
Beef	1,000,000
Chicken	3,500
Soybean	2,000
Rice	1,912
Wheat	900
Potato	500

除了破壞環境和生態系統之外，不難估算出畜牧業是最浪費能源的產業； 人們耗費了龐大的能源，只為了將牲畜變成餐桌上的肉食。而且生產一公斤的肉，也會排放36.4公斤的二氧化碳。根據計算，生產一卡熱量的黃豆蛋白質僅需兩 卡的石化能源，玉米或小麥則需要三卡；然而生產一卡熱量的牛肉蛋白質，卻需消耗54卡的石油能源！

Besides the damages to the environment and ecosystem, it is not hard to calculate that animal-based agriculture is the least energy-efficient practice; it takes enormous energy to convert livestock to meat on people’s dining table. Producing one kilogram of meat causes carbon dioxide emissions equivalent to 36.4 kilos. It is calculated that to produce one calorie of protein takes only two calories of fossil fuel for soybean, three calories for corn and wheat, but it takes 54 calories of petroleum energy for beef protein!

由此顯示出，生產一份牛肉漢堡所消耗的石化能源，是生產一份黃豆漢堡的27倍！

It means it takes 27 times as much fossil fuel energy to make a hamburger as it takes to make a soy burger!

綜觀能源成本、耗水量、土地使用、環境污染、生態威脅等各方面，我們毫不意外地發現，生產一份肉食餐飲所消耗的資源，足以提供至少十五份的蔬食餐飲。

n combination of energy cost, water consumption, land usage, environmental pollution, ecosystem disruption, it is not surprising to learn that one meat-based diet could feed 15 plant-based diets or more.

去年，芝加哥大學地球物理科學系的研究員吉登‧埃胥爾（Gidon Eshel）和潘蜜拉‧瑪汀（Pamela Martin）的研究，也顯示了食物生產和環境問題之間的關聯。他們將生產紅肉、魚肉、禽肉、牛奶和蛋類所產生的溫室氣體加以量化，並與生產純素糧食所產 生的溫室氣體量對照，結果發現，從標準的美式飲食轉換成蔬食，每人每年可以減少1.5公噸的溫室氣體排放。相較之下，從豐田Camry轎車轉換成豐田Prius油電混合車，則可減少約1公噸的二氧化碳排放量。

Last year, researchers from the Department of Geophysical Sciences at the University of Chicago, Gidon Eshel and Pamela Martin, also disclosed the connections between food production and environmental problems. They quantified the greenhouse gas consequences of red meat, fish, poultry, milk and eggs, and compared those numbers to a vegan diet. They found that switching from the standard American diet to a plant-based diet could result in preventing an extra ton and a half of greenhouse emissions per person per year. By contrast, switching from a standard sedan like a Toyota Camry to a hybrid Toyota Prius saves about one ton of CO₂ emissions.

　

假設熱量攝取相等，與純素飲食相比，以各種肉類為主的飲食會使溫室氣體所造成的負荷雪上加霜。為了便於比較， 右圖亦列出不同款式汽車在排放溫室氣體方面的差異。 以混合了紅肉、禽肉和魚肉的飲食為例，當攝取自肉類的熱量達到47%時，所造成的溫室氣體排放量，相當於Suburban運動休旅車和Camry轎車之間溫室氣體排放的差異。

　

The greenhouse gas burdens exerted by various animal-based diets compared to a vegan diet of the same caloric intake. For comparison, the differences in greenhouse gas emissions among various car models are also shown. For example, a mixed-meat diet, which combines red meat with poultry and fish, matches the emissions disparity between a Suburban and a Camry when caloric intake from animal sources reaches 47 percent.

抉擇就在你的廚房裡：儘管人們無視於畜牧業罔顧道德的殘酷行為，遏止氣候變遷的緊迫程度與作法已昭然若揭，這不只是素食者或環保人士的說法而已，目 前聯合國「跨政府氣候變遷小組」的主席帕卓里博士已告知世人，吃肉對我們的星球有害，我們應該停止吃肉以扭轉情勢；然而這有賴於人們作出正確的抉擇。我們 每個人都有責任使地球變得更涼爽、更潔淨、更健康，方法很簡單，只要從自家廚房開始做起，也就是選擇吃素，並協助扭轉氣候變遷的頹勢。

The choice is right in your kitchen: Even if one chooses to close their eyes to the ethical cruelty in animal-based agriculture, the urgency of stopping climate change and how to do it is clear. And it’s not just the vegetarians or environmentalists who are saying it; now the head of an international body, Dr. Pachauri, has announced to the world that the effects of meat-eating are detrimental to our planet and that we should stop eating meat in order to turn things around. Yet it comes down to people’s choice. We’re all responsible for a cooler, cleaner and healthier Earth. So simply start in your kitchen: choose a vegetarian diet and help reverse climate change.

參考資料：
Reference:
1.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kathy-freston/vegetarian-is-the-new-pri_b_39014.html 2.http://www.goveg.com/environment-globalwarming.asp 3.http://www.satyamag.com/feb07/eshel.html

Dr. Will Turtle: The world peace diet chapter 11 and the references used therein
4.http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5iIVBkZpOUA9Hz3Xc2u-61mDlrw0Q
5.http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=20772&Cr=global&Cr1=warming 6.http://www.news.cornell.edu/releases/Aug97/livestock.hrs.html
7.衛爾．託特博士（Dr. Will Turtle）：世界和平的飲食第11章及參考引據資料

文章來自清海無上師新聞雜誌194期”http://www.godsdirectcontact.org.tw/ch/news/194/index.htm
http://classic.godsdirectcontact.org.tw/eng/news/194/index.htm

挪威總理：南極冰融警鐘響起

更新日期:2008/01/21 11:22

（路透南極特洛站20日電）挪威總理史托騰柏格（Jens Stoltenberg ）訪問冰雪遍地的南極大陸之後於今天表示，警鐘正在提醒我們南極大陸冰雪加速融化的危險。南極冰雪融化可能讓全球海平面升高。

科學家表示，新偵測到的南極地底湖泊是否可能讓冰雪崩進大海或氣候變遷是否可能讓南冰洋暖化，且讓海上浮冰融化讓冰河後退，都有難以量化的風險。

史托騰柏格結束為期2天的挪威特洛研究站（Troll station）訪問行程後告訴路透：「情況令人擔憂。決策者忽視這些徵兆是不負責任的。」特洛研究站位於南極東部。

挪威上週訂定一個遠大目標，希望在2030年以前成為「碳平衡」（carbon neutral）的國家，也就是將燃燒石化燃料後的廢氣排放量減到0。

然而挪威的計畫包括計入大森林的計算方法，因為目前聯合國的規定不允許各國將森林計入碳平衡計畫，使得挪威這項措施引起爭議。這種計算方法是，森林能夠吸收 溫室效應氣體，計算森林就能得出吸收總量，作為抵消石化燃料廢氣的依據。

史托騰柏格在距離海岸250公里的研究站說：「我們需要更精確的知識。科學家沒說他們知道（南極）正在發生什麼事，但是他們擔心南極大陸上的冰雪可能滑入海中並融化。」中央社（翻譯）

Rethinking the Meat-Guzzler

Finally someone tells the truth!

There is a great article "Rethinking the Meat-Guzzler" on the front page of the 'Week in Review' section in today's NY Times. The Times made sure that it pointed out the author "is not a vegetarian". It's a good article to be forwarded to people we know. Here is the link to the article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/27/weekinreview/27bittman.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=Rethinking+the+Meat-Guzzler&st=nyt&oref=slogin

The New York Times, Sunday, January 27, 2008

The World

Rethinking the Meat-Guzzler

By MARK BITTMAN

A SEA change in the consumption of a resource that Americans take for granted may be in store — something cheap, plentiful, widely enjoyed and a part of daily life. And it isn't oil. Skip to next paragraphIt's meat.

The two commodities share a great deal: Like oil, meat is subsidized by the federal government. Like oil, meat is subject to accelerating demand as nations become wealthier, and this, in turn, sends prices higher. Finally — like oil — meat is something people are encouraged to consume less of, as the toll exacted by industrial production increases, and becomes increasingly visible.

Global demand for meat has multiplied in recent years, encouraged by growing affluence and nourished by the proliferation of huge, confined animal feeding operations. These assembly-line meat factories consume enormous amounts of energy, pollute water supplies, generate significant greenhouse gases and require ever-increasing amounts of corn, soy and other grains, a dependency that has led to the destruction of vast swaths of the world's tropical rain forests.

Just this week, the president of Brazil announced emergency measures to halt the burning and cutting of the country's rain forests for crop and grazing land. In the last five months alone, the government says, 1,250 square miles were lost.

The world's total meat supply was 71 million tons in 1961. In 2007, it was estimated to be 284 million tons. Per capita consumption has more than doubled over that period. (In the developing world, it rose twice as fast, doubling in the last 20 years.) World meat consumption is expected to double again by 2050, which one expert, Henning Steinfeld of the United Nations, says is resulting in a "relentless growth in livestock production."

Americans eat about the same amount of meat as we have for some time, about eight ounces a day, roughly twice the global average. At about 5 percent of the world's population, we "process" (that is, grow and kill) nearly 10 billion animals a year, more than 15 percent of the world's total.

Growing meat (it's hard to use the word "raising" when applied to animals in factory farms) uses so many resources that it's a challenge to enumerate them all. But consider: an estimated 30 percent of the earth's ice-free land is directly or indirectly involved in livestock production, according to the United Nation's Food and Agriculture Organization, which also estimates that livestock production generates nearly a fifth of the world's greenhouse gases — more than transportation.

To put the energy-using demand of meat production into easy-to-understand terms, Gidon Eshel, a geophysicist at the Bard Center, and Pamela A. Martin, an assistant professor of geophysics at the University of Chicago, calculated that if Americans were to reduce meat consumption by just 20 percent it would be as if we all switched from a standard sedan — a Camry, say — to the ultra-efficient Prius. Similarly, a study last year by the National Institute of Livestock and Grassland Science in Japan estimated that 2.2 pounds of beef is responsible for the equivalent amount of carbon dioxide emitted by the average European car every 155 miles, and burns enough energy to light a 100-watt bulb for nearly 20 days.

Grain, meat and even energy are roped together in a way that could have dire results. More meat means a corresponding increase in demand for feed, especially corn and soy, which some experts say will contribute to higher prices.

This will be inconvenient for citizens of wealthier nations, but it could have tragic consequences for those of poorer ones, especially if higher prices for feed divert production away from food crops. The demand for ethanol is already pushing up prices, and explains, in part, the 40 percent rise last year in the food price index calculated by the United Nations' Food and Agricultural Organization.

Though some 800 million people on the planet now suffer from hunger or malnutrition, the majority of corn and soy grown in the world feeds cattle, pigs and chickens. This despite the inherent inefficiencies: about two to five times more grain is required to produce the same amount of calories through livestock as through direct grain consumption, according to Rosamond Naylor, an associate professor of economics at Stanford University. It is as much as 10 times more in the case of grain-fed beef in the United States.

The environmental impact of growing so much grain for animal feed is profound. Agriculture in the United States — much of which now serves the demand for meat — contributes to nearly three-quarters of all water-quality problems in the nation's rivers and streams, according to the Environmental Protection Agency.

Because the stomachs of cattle are meant to digest grass, not grain, cattle raised industrially thrive only in the sense that they gain weight quickly. This diet made it possible to remove cattle from their natural environment and encourage the efficiency of mass confinement and slaughter. But it causes enough health problems that administration of antibiotics is routine, so much so that it can result in antibiotic-resistant bacteria that threaten the usefulness of medicines that treat people.

Those grain-fed animals, in turn, are contributing to health problems among the world's wealthier citizens — heart disease, some types of cancer, diabetes. The argument that meat provides useful protein makes sense, if the quantities are small. But the "you gotta eat meat" claim collapses at American levels. Even if the amount of meat we eat weren't harmful, it's way more than enough.

Americans are downing close to 200 pounds of meat, poultry and fish per capita per year (dairy and eggs are separate, and hardly insignificant), an increase of 50 pounds per person from 50 years ago. We each consume something like 110 grams of protein a day, about twice the federal government's recommended allowance; of that, about 75 grams come from animal protein. (The recommended level is itself considered by many dietary experts to be higher than it needs to be.) It's likely that most of us would do just fine on around 30 grams of protein a day, virtually all of it from plant sources .

What can be done? There's no simple answer. Better waste management, for one. Eliminating subsidies would also help; the United Nations estimates that they account for 31 percent of global farm income. Improved farming practices would help, too. Mark W. Rosegrant, director of environment and production technology at the nonprofit International Food Policy Research Institute, says, "There should be investment in livestock breeding and management, to reduce the footprint needed to produce any given level of meat."

Skip to next paragraphThen there's technology. Israel and Korea are among the countries experimenting with using animal waste to generate electricity. Some of the biggest hog operations in the United States are working, with some success, to turn manure into fuel.

Longer term, it no longer seems lunacy to believe in the possibility of "meat without feet" — meat produced in vitro, by growing animal cells in a super-rich nutrient environment before being further manipulated into burgers and steaks.

Another suggestion is a return to grazing beef, a very real alternative as long as you accept the psychologically difficult and politically unpopular notion of eating less of it. That's because grazing could never produce as many cattle as feedlots do. Still, said Michael Pollan, author of the recent book "In Defense of Food," "In places where you can't grow grain, fattening cows on grass is always going to make more sense."

But pigs and chickens, which convert grain to meat far more efficiently than beef, are increasingly the meats of choice for producers, accounting for 70 percent of total meat production, with industrialized systems producing half that pork and three-quarters of the chicken.

Once, these animals were raised locally (even many New Yorkers remember the pigs of Secaucus), reducing transportation costs and allowing their manure to be spread on nearby fields. Now hog production facilities that resemble prisons more than farms are hundreds of miles from major population centers, and their manure "lagoons" pollute streams and groundwater. (In Iowa alone, hog factories and farms produce more than 50 million tons of excrement annually.)

These problems originated here, but are no longer limited to the United States. While the domestic demand for meat has leveled off, the industrial production of livestock is growing more than twice as fast as land-based methods, according to the United Nations.

Perhaps the best hope for change lies in consumers' becoming aware of the true costs of industrial meat production. "When you look at environmental problems in the U.S.," says Professor Eshel, "nearly all of them have their source in food production and in particular meat production. And factory farming is 'optimal' only as long as degrading waterways is free. If dumping this stuff becomes costly — even if it simply carries a non-zero price tag — the entire structure of food production will change dramatically."

Animal welfare may not yet be a major concern, but as the horrors of raising meat in confinement become known, more animal lovers may start to react. And would the world not be a better place were some of the grain we use to grow meat directed instead to feed our fellow human beings?

Real prices of beef, pork and poultry have held steady, perhaps even decreased, for 40 years or more (in part because of grain subsidies), though we're beginning to see them increase now. But many experts, including Tyler Cowen, a professor of economics at George Mason University, say they don't believe meat prices will rise high enough to affect demand in the United States.

"I just don't think we can count on market prices to reduce our meat consumption," he said. "There may be a temporary spike in food prices, but it will almost certainly be reversed and then some. But if all the burden is put on eaters, that's not a tragic state of affairs."

If price spikes don't change eating habits, perhaps the combination of deforestation, pollution, climate change, starvation, heart disease and animal cruelty will gradually encourage the simple daily act of eating more plants and fewer animals.

Mr. Rosegrant of the food policy research institute says he foresees "a stronger public relations campaign in the reduction of meat consumption — one like that around cigarettes — emphasizing personal health, compassion for animals, and doing good for the poor and the planet."

It wouldn't surprise Professor Eshel if all of this had a real impact. "The good of people's bodies and the good of the planet are more or less perfectly aligned," he said.

The United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organization, in its detailed 2006 study of the impact of meat consumption on the planet, "Livestock's Long Shadow," made a similar point: "There are reasons for optimism that the conflicting demands for animal products and environmental services can be reconciled. Both demands are exerted by the same group of people ... the relatively affluent, middle- to high-income class, which is no longer confined to industrialized countries. ... This group of consumers is probably ready to use its growing voice to exert pressure for change and may be willing to absorb the inevitable price increases."

In fact, Americans are already buying more environmentally friendly products, choosing more sustainably produced meat, eggs and dairy. The number of farmers' markets has more than doubled in the last 10 years or so, and it has escaped no one's notice that the organic food market is growing fast. These all represent products that are more expensive but of higher quality.

If those trends continue, meat may become a treat rather than a routine. It won't be uncommon, but just as surely as the S.U.V. will yield to the hybrid, the half-pound-a-day meat era will end.

Maybe that's not such a big deal. "Who said people had to eat meat three times a day?" asked Mr. Pollan.

聯合國：融冰減少太陽能量反射 暖化加劇

更新日期:2007/06/04 21:50 陳昶佑

（法新社挪威特琅索四日電） 聯合國今天公布報告警告，地球冰雪融解正讓全球暖化的影響加速，可能對人類、經濟與野生物帶來廣泛衝擊。

「全球冰雪展望」報告作者普瑞斯楚在挪威極圈城鎮特琅索召開記者會說：「雪與冰可反射七至八成的太陽能量，水則會吸收。如果雪與冰繼續融解，這將造成全球暖化加劇。」

聯合國環境計畫署今天公布這份報告，以紀念明天的世界環境日。

報告中說，亞洲山區出現雪融與冰河消失，估計可能影響全球四成人口。亞洲許多河流發源於喜馬拉雅山，冰雪減少代表飲用水與農業用水減少。

此外，海平面上升將影響低漥沿岸地區與島嶼，重創孟加拉或印尼等國。

冰雪融解可能增加雪崩與洪水災害。

氣溫上升加上永凍土融解，造成在西伯利亞等地區的現有湖泊擴張，甚至出現新湖泊與河川。
普瑞斯楚說：「人類活動導致冰雪持續融解。如果溫室氣體持續排放，它們也將繼續融解。」

食物背後的真相

食物背後的真相 The Truth behind Your Food

紐西蘭奧克蘭杜慧明 （原文為英文）By sister-initiate Hui-Ming Toh, Auckland, New Zealand (Originally in English)

你會打開冰箱，拿出二十盤義大利麵，把它們倒進垃圾桶，而只吃一盤食物嗎？你會為了一頓午餐，而將五十五平方英尺的雨林夷平，或把二千五百加侖的水倒進下水道裡，你認為這樣做如何？當然，你不會這麼做。但只要食用半公斤的肉就會製造這種情況。吃肉會造成無效率的耗費、破壞我們的資源及環境、造成動物無邊的痛苦，並對我們的健康產生不良的影響。因此，如果燒烤一隻狗來搭配你的馬鈴薯泥會讓你感到不安的話，那你為什麼要燒烤其他溫和的動物呢？

Would you ever open your fridge, pull out twenty plates of pasta and chuck them into the bin, and then, eat only one plate of food? How about leveling fifty-five square feet of rainforest for one lunch or dumping two-thousand-five-hundred gallons of water down the drain? Of course you wouldn't. However, just eating half a kilo of meat will cause this. Eating meat will cause inefficient use and destruction to our resources and environment, cause immense animal suffering, and have detrimental effects on our health. So, if roasting a dog to complement your mashed potato disturbs you, then why roast any other gentle animal?

(廢料湖方圓農場是猶他州一家豬肉供應商，擁有一個三百萬加侖的廢料湖。一九九五年，北卡羅來納州這種廢料湖排放至河川和湖泊時就曾造成環境的災難。 )

Waste Lagoon:Circle Four Farms, a Utah-based pork producer, hosts a three-million gallon waste lagoon. When lagoons like this spill into rivers and lakes as happened in North Carolina in 1995, the result can be environmentally catastrophic.

有份聯合國的報告已經證實：「我們環境的頭號威脅是牛隻而非車子。」報告中的證據顯示，全球牛隻數量快速增加，對於氣候、森林及野生動物最具威脅性。農場動物所排出的糞便，是美國所有人口排出量的一百三十倍，而這些高濃度的排泄物最後會污染水源和空氣，並破壞土壤表層。此外，這些動物排出的腸氣和糞肥所產生的甲烷，超過全球總量的三分之一，這種氣體造成地球暖化的速度，比二氧化碳快上二十倍。動物排泄物每秒就有八萬六千磅產生，肉食者必須對此負完全責任；但只要您戒除動物性食品，就可以免責。

A UN report has identified that “cows not cars, are the top threat to our environment.” It gives evidence that the world's rapidly growing herds of cattle is the greatest threat to the climate, forests and wildlife. Farmed animals produce one-hundred-and-thirty times more excrement than the entire human population of the United States and this concentrated slop ends up polluting water, destroying top soil and contaminating our air. Furthermore, their bodily gas and manure emit more than one third of methane, which warms the world twenty times faster than carbon dioxide. Meat-eaters are responsible for the production of one hundred percent of these wastes which is about eighty-six-thousand pounds per second. But, by giving up animal products, you will be responsible for none of these.

此外，我們對肉食的喜好，正不斷地耗損許多無法再生的能源。每生產一磅牛肉就需要二千五百加侖的驚人水量；相較之下，生產一磅番茄卻只需二十九加侖的水，生產一磅的全麥麵包也只要一百三十九加侖的水。美國一半的用水和百分之八十的農地，以及幾乎所有收成的黃豆和全球一半以上的榖物，都耗費在飼養肉用動物上。當我們在吃肉的同時，正有十億人口遭受饑餓及營養不良之苦，每天有二萬四千名孩童餓死在種植穀物的田野旁，而這些穀物卻拿去餵食西方國家的家畜。然而，我們若能善用有限的資源，將土地改為種植供人類食用的農作物，就可以消除世界的饑荒問題。

Moreover, our taste for meat is taking a toll on our supply of non-renewable resources. A staggering two-thousand-five-hundred gallons of water is needed for the production of each pound of beef, but, in contrast, it takes only twenty-nine gallons to produce a pound of tomatoes and a hundred-and-thirty-nine gallons for a pound of whole wheat bread. Half the water, eighty percent of agricultural land in the United States, almost all the soy bean harvest and over half of the world's grain is used to raise animals for food. While we are doing this, one billion people are suffering from hunger and malnutrition and twenty-four-thousand children die every day alongside fields of grain destined for the West's livestock. However, world starvation would be eliminated if our scarce resources were utilized efficiently by converting land to raising crops for feeding people.

(索馬利亞饑荒：索馬利亞的饑荒根源於食物的短缺。製造一磅牛肉需要四點八磅穀類，近代農業評論報導指出：肉食的推廣加重了世界的饑荒。 )

Somali Famine Victims:Somalian famine victims line up for food handouts. Producing a pound of beef requires 4.8 pounds of grain, and critics of our modern agricultural system say that the spread of meat-based diets aggravates world hunger.

你可知道在紐西蘭每年有一億三千萬隻動物遭到宰殺嗎？大部分的動物被飼養在工廠化養殖場中，這套系統力求以最少的成本達到最大的產量。因此，這些動物活著時，他們的身心分分秒秒都承受著極大的痛苦。他們擠在骯髒又不見天日的狹小空間裡，無法養育他們的家人，不能扒土為樂或做任何符合他們天性的事情。他們甚至體會不到陽光照在背部的舒服感，也呼吸不到新鮮的空氣，一直到被載上卡車待宰的那一天為止。在紐西蘭，就有超過九千萬隻動物遭受這種不人道的對待，還有許多動物是在清醒的狀況下被割喉而流血致死。

Are you aware that one-hundred-and-thirty million animals are murdered annually in New Zealand? Most animals are raised on factory farms, the system which strives to maximize output at minimum costs. As a result, the animals suffer immense pain mentally and physically every second of their lives. They are crammed into filthy windowless confinement systems and will never raise their families, rummage in the soil or do anything that is natural to them. They won't even feel the sun on their backs or breathe fresh air until the day they are loaded onto trucks, destined for slaughter. Over ninety million animals in New Zealand suffer these conditions and many remain conscious as their throats are cut, then, left to bleed to death.

農場經營者常用的另一種殘忍做法是：剝奪禽類的食物長達十四天之久，使他們的身體產生恐慌反應而生產更多的蛋，以供人類食用。由於小公雞對肉品業毫無用處，因此每年有一億隻小公雞被活活碾碎，或被棄置於袋子裡悶死。尤有甚者，在屠宰場中，雞隻被割了脖子後，有許多還活生生地就被浸在滾燙的熱水中，以便拔除身上的羽毛。

Another cruel practice farmers often carry out is the deprivation of food from birds for fourteen days in order to shock their bodies into laying more eggs for human consumption. And, because male chicks are useless in the meat industry, each year a hundred million of them are ground up alive or tossed into bags to suffocate. What's more, at the slaughter house, the chickens throats are cut, and they are immersed in scalding hot water to remove their feathers while many are still alive.

即使現在，牧場經營者為了幫牛隻做記號以易於辨認，就直接用熱火鉗烙在牛皮上，造成第三度灼傷，令他們痛苦哀嚎。還有，在完全沒有麻醉的情況下，小公牛的睪丸從陰囊中被剝除。更加深他們痛苦的是：放牧牛隻的土地上瀰漫著化學藥劑，這些煙霧造成他們慢性呼吸系統的問題，致使呼吸變得困難。

Even nowadays, to mark cows for identification, ranchers push hot fire irons into their flesh as they bellow in pain. Consequently, third degree burns occur and male calves' testicles are ripped from their scrotums all without pain relief. To add to their suffering, the land which cattle graze on has air saturated with chemicals and these fumes cause chronic respiratory problems, therefore making breathing painful.

專門供應牛乳的母牛不斷地受孕，然後她們的小孩又被帶走，原本要給小牛喝的牛奶卻供人類飲用。她們每天有好幾次被接上擠奶器，經由基因控制法、強效賀爾蒙及密集擠奶，被迫生產比自然產量還多十倍的牛奶，結果引發令她們極度痛苦的乳腺炎，有高達百分之五十的乳牛深受其苦。

Cows used for their milk are repeatedly impregnated and their babies taken away so that humans can drink the milk intended for the calves. They are hooked up to machines several times daily and using genetic manipulation, powerful hormones, and intensive milking, they are forced to produce ten times more milk as they naturally would. This contributes to the immensely painful inflammation of their udder which up to fifty percent of dairy cows suffer from.

現今，對於工廠化養殖場的動物，沒有法令保護他們免於殘酷的虐待，而這些行為若加諸在家庭寵物身上，則屬違法，例如：疏於照顧、致殘、基因操控、導致長期痛苦和殘害的施藥、及殘暴的屠宰。小說家兼詩人羅伯特‧路易士‧史蒂文生（Robert Louis Stevenson）說：「我們吃下與我們具有相似慾望、熱情與器官的動物屍體。」我們疼愛狗兒、貓咪，視他們為夥伴，然而，農場動物的智能與感受痛苦的能力並不亞於這些寵物。

Animals on today's factory farms have no legal protection from cruelty that would be illegal if it were inflicted on household pets: neglect, mutilation, genetic manipulation, and drug programs that cause chronic pain and crippling and, violent slaughter. Robert Louis Stevenson, a novelist and poet said, “We consume the carcasses of creatures of like appetites, passions and organs with our own.” Yet, farmed animals are no less intelligent or capable of feeling pain than are the dogs and cats we cherish as companions.

這一點可以經由一些常見的報導來證實，例如：牛隻跳過六英尺高的圍籬，逃離了屠宰場，然後走了七哩路，只為了與小牛團聚，接著他們一起游泳渡河奔向自由。豬也是一樣；英國政府的科學顧問唐納德‧布魯姆博士（Dr. Donald Broom）發現豬是具有洞察力的動物：「豬具有很高的認知能力，因此會顯得相當世故，他們的認知能力甚至比狗還高，當然也高於三歲小孩。」

This is demonstrated by the frequent reports of cows leaping over a six-foot fence to escape a slaughterhouse, walking seven miles to be reunited with a calf and swimming across a river to freedom. Pigs, too, are insightful animals as discovered by Dr. Donald Broom, scientific advisor to the British government - “[Pigs] have the cognitive ability to be quite sophisticated. Even more so than dogs and certainly three-year-olds.”

為了要拯救地球，減少人類及動物的苦難，你所能採取的最重要行動就是吃素。富含複合碳水化合物、蛋白質、纖維素、omega-3多元不飽和脂肪酸、維他命及礦物質的素食餐飲，可以提供我們最理想的營養，並奠下良好的飲食習慣基礎，讓我們享有健康的人生。柯林‧坎貝爾教授（Professor T. Colin Campbell）所著的《中國研究》（The China Study）一書，也提出許多有力的證據：「在未來十年中，你一定會得知一項訊息：動物性蛋白質是所有食物中最具毒性的營養素…只要飲食中含有少量的動物性蛋白質，就會大大地提高罹患疾病的風險。」根據研究顯示，吃素的小孩比同儕具有更高的智商，而素食者的平均壽命也比肉食者長六至十年。此外，他們罹患心臟病和癌症的機率減少了百分之五十。肉食者過胖的情況，則比素食者高出九倍。素食提供我們所需的全部營養，且不含飽和脂肪、膽固醇和污染物。

The most important step you can take to save our planet and diminish both human and animal suffering is to go vegetarian. A meat free diet rich in complex carbohydrates, protein, fiber, omega-three, vitamins and minerals provides optimal nutrition, forming the foundation for dietary habits that support a lifetime of good health. Compelling evidence can be found in the book “The China Study” by Professor T. Colin Campbell which says, “in the next ten years, one of the things you're bound to hear is that animal protein is one of the most toxic nutrients of all…risk for disease goes up dramatically when even a little animal protein is added to the diet.” Studies have shown that vegetarian kids have higher IQs than their classmates and vegetarians live, on average, six to ten years longer than meat-eaters. In addition to this, they are fifty percent less likely to develop heart disease and cancer, plus, meat eaters are nine times more likely to be obese than vegans are. Vegetarian foods provide us with all the nutrients we need, minus the saturated fat, cholesterol, and contaminants.

許多人反而辯稱植物也具有生命。確實如此，但植物只有百分之十的意識，而動物的意識卻與人類相似。由於植物無法移動，它們不太需要具備感知痛苦的能力，因此，植物與哺乳動物在生理上全然不同。如果你修剪樹上的枝葉，它會長得更多、更茂盛。而動物卻不希望被定期修剪；你能砍掉牛的一條腿，然後期待他再長出四條腿嗎？

Conversely, many argue that plants are alive too. This is true, but plants have only ten percent consciousness while animals have consciousness equivalent to humans. Since plants cannot locomote, the sensation of experiencing pain would be superfluous. Thus, plants differ completely physiologically from mammals. If you cut a branch or leaves off a tree, it will flourish and grow more. On the other hand, animals do not desire regular pruning. Can you cut off a leg from a cow and expect it to grow four more legs?

飼養動物來食用，已造成了地球的浩劫，環境、資源及我們的健康正日益惡化。儘管我們大部分的人不會輕易饒恕殺生之事，但卻在社會的助長下養成了吃肉的習慣，而沒有真正去了解我們所吃下的動物遭到什麼樣的對待。有人說：「走一趟屠宰場就能使你終生茹素，因為正是我們造成了他們痛苦與恐懼的哀號。」因此，如果你打算再燒烤一隻溫和的動物…請記得，你所吃下的動物和你所深愛的寵物並沒有兩樣；唯一不同的是，這隻動物慘遭痛苦折磨。

Raising animals for food is wreaking havoc on Earth. The environment, resources and our health are deteriorating and although most of us do not actively condone killing, humans have developed the habit, supported by society, of eating meat without any real awareness of what is being done to the animals we eat. It is said that, “one visit to a slaughterhouse will make you a vegetarian for life. Because it is us who created their screams of pain and fear.” So, if you ever decide to roast a gentle animal again…remember you are consuming the flesh of one equivalent to your much loved pets. But, the only difference is that this animal was tortured.

以下的網址有很多令人震驚的圖片:http://www.goveg.com/photos.asphttp://www.viva.org.uk/photogallery/galleryindex.htm
家畜對環境的影響，請搜尋全球地圖連結網:http://www.virtualcentre.org/en/library/key_pub/longshad/a0701e/A0701E09a.pdf

There are many shocking pictures on the following websites:http://www.goveg.com/photos.asphttp://www.viva.org.uk/photogallery/galleryindex.htm
Please find global maps on livestock's environmental impact through following link :http://www.virtualcentre.org/en/library/key_pub/longshad/a0701e/A0701E09a.pdf

雨林 - 綠色地球的肺

Rainforests - the green lungs of the Earth

焚燒雨林 破壞自然生態系統

Burning the rainforests destroys a natural ecosystem

枯萎和荒蕪之地 是幾個漢堡付出的代價！

This scorched and barren landscape is the cost of just a few hamburgers!

*作者是一位十七歲的中學應屆畢業生，她的這篇校內評估之用的文章獲得特優的成績

* The author is a 17-year-old student in her final year of secondary school. The article was an internal assessment for which she was awarded the top grade of excellence.

來源:

http://al.godsdirectcontact.org/your_food/Chinese-t.htm

http://al.godsdirectcontact.org/your_food/English.htm

《六度的變化：一個愈來愈熱星球的未來 》

http://tw.myblog.yahoo.com/ultrasonicfly/article?mid=1520&prev=1521&next=1514

當全球溫度
升高攝氏一度的時候，非洲大陸冰雪蕩然無存，北極熊、海象和環斑海豹，從地球的北端銷聲匿跡。

升高攝氏二度，從鯖魚到鬚鯨淘汰出局，格陵蘭冰原徹底消融，全球海平面升高 七米 。

升高攝氏三度，亞馬遜河流域熱帶雨林大部分會在大火中被燒毀，數千萬或者幾十億難民會從乾旱的亞熱帶地區遷移到中緯度地區。

升高攝氏四度，整個北冰洋冰帽也會消失，全球海平面會又提高 五米 ，倫敦周邊夏季氣溫將達攝氏四十五度。
升高攝氏五度，兩極均沒有冰雪存在，南極洲中部可能有森林生長，海洋中大規模的物種滅絕，大規模海嘯摧毀海岸。

升高攝氏六度，高達百分之九十五的物種滅絕。地球上的生物將會在超級暴風雨、洪水、硫化氫氣體、以及甲烷火球帶著原子彈般的力量流竄地表時，完全滅絕；唯一能存活的只有黴菌。

＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝

去年才有科學家提出警告，依照現今的全球暖化速度估算，北極將在2040年出現夏季完全無冰的情況。現在新研究發現，北極融冰速度比先前預測的快得多，上述情況可能提早到2012年出現！

新聞來源東森新聞（ 2007/12/12 ）：http://www.ettoday.com/2007/12/12/91-2200910.htm
圖片來源美國太空總署(NASA)：http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a000000/a003400/a003464/index.html

清海無上師與全球科學家鄭重呼籲.....全球緊急行動,拯救我們的星球 !

鑑於最近諸多科學報告，紛紛呼籲大眾關注氣候變遷和我們星球的未來，「無上師電視台」對此非常重視，元月 21日特別敬邀 清海無上師討論這些議題與解決之道； 清海無上師雖日理萬機，仍撥冗應邀 通過電話會議回答問題。

近日 清海無上師告訴我們世界會會員，我們的星球岌岌可危。她提到地球需要維持平衡，而許多頂尖科學家也所見略同。根據美國南加州大學的研究，在二億五千萬年前，也發生過一次類似的情況，影響了無數的動、植物，造成九成地球物種滅絕。當問及目前全球氣候變遷是否可比擬地球歷史上像這樣的事件時， 無上師 回答："是的。"因為溫度升高會導致大量海底有毒氣體釋放到空氣中，導致物種滅絕。華盛頓大學 與賓州州立大學的 研究都得出同樣的結論。

電視台問無上師：" 您是否有什 麼訊息想要傳達 給世界的領袖們？"

師父說：" 我會告訴他們， 運用他們莫大的力量來改變大眾 的飲 食習慣 ， 並立刻採用可再生能源。 自己也以身作則吃素或吃全素。 他們必須帶頭吃素

然後 真正運用他們的力量 ， 就像他們實施禁 菸， 他們也可以禁止吃肉 ， 列舉 吃肉對人類與地球所造成的所有傷害 。

芝加哥州立大學的研究人員在他們的新書「飲食、能源與全球暖化」中表示，改採素食所減少的碳排量，比從駕駛雪佛蘭越野車轉為開豐田普瑞斯油電混合車，還多百分之五十。

問："我們對地球所做的努力能逆轉氣候變遷造成的破壞嗎？"

"是，可以做到某個程度，如果世界的政府與人民行動快一點，也許情況還能逆轉。但我想無法百分之百完全回到世界最初的狀態。如果我們快一點，世界就不會變得更糟。這樣地球就能被更好的保護，這樣也許一些破壞能被修復。"

"我真的希望我們可以繼續生存在地球，小孩可以在更好的環境下長大，但這全都要看人類如何決定，看他們如何改變而定。"

"師父，另一個問題是，如果您想告訴世界大眾一個訊息，那是什麼呢？

"那就是我好愛他們！"

感謝清海無上師對人類及地球的未來深切的愛與信心。她的真知灼見為我們帶來靈感與希望。但願在我們的共同努力下，能為我們與下一代創造一個持久又健康的環境。

清海無上師結束語："不只是運用科技而已，因為業力比科技的影響還大，所以我們一定要靠吃素，讓所有人能享有和平。首先要吃素，然後再加上科技輔助。素食帶來長遠的利益，減少業障、壞的影響，才能獲得天堂的恩典！"

廣受歡迎的免費衛星電視「無上師電視台」全球每天 24小時同步直播, 北美洲的觀眾可透過西經97 度的Galaxy25衛星收看, 購買優惠衛星接收系統請洽

1-770-420-5272 ； www.wsidigital.com/smtvsat 。

觀眾還可透過網址 www.SupremeMasterTV.com/tw/ 免費收看。 歡迎您將心得與意見，寄到電子郵箱 info-ch@suprememastertv.com ，或聯絡免費專線1-888-294-1433。

Teleconference on climate change with Supreme Master Ching Hai.

In light of recent scientific reports that are heightening concerns on climate change and our planet’s future, Supreme Master Television has great concern, thus we respectfully invited Supreme Master Ching Hai to a discussion on current issues and solutions. Despite her busy schedule, Supreme Master Ching Hai graciously granted a teleconference to address our questions.

Recently, Supreme Master Ching Hai shared with our Association members the dire situation of our planet. She spoke of the need for the Earth to maintain its equilibrium, a view shared by many leading scientists.

According to a study by the University of Southern California in the US, a similar phenomenon occurred once before already, affecting countless plant and animal species 250 million years ago.

They say that 250 million years back, 90% of Earth’s species
were already destroyed.

Yes.

So, is this climate change comparable to anything else in the history of the Earth?

Do you mean because of the gas?

Yes.

Well, it will be similar. Gas is gas.

Thanks Master.

You’re welcome.

Halo Master.

Halo.

I wanted to ask if you have a message for the leaders of the world.

I would say to them to use their mighty power to change the diet of the planet. And adopt immediately, renewable energy. And set an example by themselves by becoming a vegetarian or vegan.

They first have to be vegetarian and then they use their power truly. Like the way they forbid smoking.

They could do that in forbidding meat as well. By citing all the harm that meat would do to humans and the planet.

As the conference drew to a close, the call to global action was made very clear.
What was equally certain was that saving the planet depends on how soon those actions are taken.

Are the effects of what we have done to the planet reversible in regards to climate change?

Oh well, to some extent, if the government and the people in the world act fast, maybe we can reverse somehow. But I think not so quickly 100%, like the primordial of the world before.

Yes.

If we act fast, then the world will not get worse. And then the Earth will be more protected, then maybe some damage will be recovered.

I wish really that we have the planet, we continue to live, and the children grow up in a better environment.

But it’s up to humanity to decide what they want and which direction they turn.

Master, another question is, if you had a message for the world, what would it be?

That I love them very much.

We sincerely thank

Supreme Master Ching Hai for your deep love and faith in humanity for the future of our planet. We are grateful for your taking the time to share your insights, which truly give us inspiration and hope.We pray that together, our efforts for the planet may help to create a lasting, healthy environment for our current and future generations.

In their new book “Diet, Energy and Global Warming,” researchers at the University of Chicago state that

A VEGETARIAN DIET SAVES 50 PERCENT MORE CARBON EMISSIONS THAN SWITCHING FROM A CHEVROLET SUBURBAN SUV TO A TOYOTA PRIUS HYBRID.

It’s not just the technologies. Because the karma is more important than just the technology.

So we have to meditate on vegetarianism, you know, for all the people to have peace and to be vegetarian and the technology add into it as well.

VEGETARIANISM IS FOR THE LONG TERM BENEFIT, TO LESSEN THE KARMA, BAD RETRIBUTION, TO TOUCH THE MERCY OF HEAVEN.

WWW.SupremeMasterTV.com
Live Online 24/7 anywhere; Positive News Only
♥~~~~~~♥
Be Green & Go Veggie
Act Now to Save the Earth

Arctic sea ice 'melts to all-time low'

/\2007

\/2005

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=&xml=/earth/2007/09/22/eaice122.xml

研究：緩和全球暖化很簡單 少吃肉就可以了

更新日期:2007/09/13 14:35


(法新社巴黎十三日電） 英國權威醫學雜誌「刺胳針」在網路刊出報告指出，富裕國家的人民如果能把肉類攝取量限制在平均每人每天一個漢堡，就可以有效緩和全球暖化問題。

報告中指出，如果能達到肉類減量的成效，預計全球的肉類消耗量可以在二零五零年前減少百分之十。不論對富裕或貧困國家而言，這樣做法不但可以阻擋因農業造成的溫室效應氣體排放，也達到健身的效果。

這篇由澳洲國立大學「國家傳染病暨公共衛生研究中心」所做的研究，刊登在刺胳針醫學期刊網路上，在英國醫學週會議裡被拿來討論氣候變遷對人體健康的影響。

作者指出，全球溫室氣體排放總量中，農業佔百分之二十二，和工業所佔比例非常接近，比交通工具排放的二氧化碳排總量還高。

因家畜所造成的溫室效應氣體排放，包括運送和餵食過程中所形成的二氧化碳，約佔整體農業溫室效應氣體的百分之八十，其中大部分是甲烷。

報告中指出，目前全球平均肉品消耗量是每人每天一百公克，在富裕國家這個數字上升到二百到二百五十公克；貧窮國家則只有二十到二十五公克。

研究人員建議，全球平均肉品消耗量應該在二零五零年前減少到每人每天九十公克。其中富裕國家要設法降低消費，貧窮國家則要多吃。

報告中同時建議，每人每天最好不要吃超過五十公克的紅肉食物，包括牛、羊及其他反芻動物。

假設在二零五零年前，全球人口總數增加百分之四十，也沒有進一步降低由家畜造成的溫室效應氣體排放總量，全球的肉品消費量必須降到每人每天九十公克，才能平衡。

研究人員指出，富裕國家的人民應大量減少肉品攝取量，以降低心臟血管疾病、過胖、結腸直腸癌等其他癌症疾病的困擾。

貧窮國家的人民如果能增加肉品消費量，同樣也有益健康。

根據日本科學家在今年七月公布的一篇調查結果，一公斤牛肉大約等於三十六點四公斤的二氧化碳，相當於開車出門三小時，而家中燈火通明所排放的二氧化碳總量。

http://tw.news.yahoo.com/article/url/d/a/070913/19/kh6o.html

科學家: 北極冰帽溶解速度創下空前紀錄

更新日期:2007/12/14 19:35

（法新社華盛頓十三日電） 美國科學家在本週的一項會議上說，北極冰帽今年年中以空前的速度溶解，消失的區域約等於阿拉斯加州的面積。

西雅圖華盛頓大學資深海洋學家史蒂爾說：「截至二零零六年，每年夏天海上浮冰消失的平均速率，約等於西維吉尼亞州的面積」，或大約六萬二千八百平方公里（二萬四千二百五十平均哩）。

史蒂爾在電話訪問中告訴法新社說，不過二零零六年與二零零七年之間，消失的冰帽「幾乎等於阿拉斯加州的面積」，或大約一百七十萬平方公里（超過六十六萬三千平方哩）。

史蒂爾說：「這是巨大後退。」他是美國地球物理學會在舊金山舉行的年會中，討論此一問題的研究人員之一。

另一位在會議上發表演說的馬斯洛夫斯基說，北極冰帽目前約有四百一十三萬平方公里，這是近代史上北極冰帽最小的時候。他在會議上說，因此，北冰洋在二零一三年之前的夏季三個月期間，可能完全沒有浮冰。

史蒂爾拒絕作相同的預測，不過他說，北冰洋在夏季期間從沒有像這麼熱。

他說：「北冰洋的溫度從未見到如此暖和，比平均數高出攝氏五度。這是很大的。」

在通常被冰覆蓋的北冰洋地區，「溫度可能比平均數高出二或三度」，而在阿拉斯加州，溫度高到超出尋常，約在攝氏十二至十三度之間。他說：「我們以前未曾見過。」

史蒂爾說，人類製造溫室排放的廢氣造成的地球暖化，「基本上是冰帽愈來愈薄的元凶」。

北極冰帽溶化速度超過科學家預期......

1979 北極冰帽

2003 北極冰帽

氣溫再持繼上升會造成海底毒氣大量噴出, 地球物種滅絕！緊急呼救，開始吃素，加入環保！

氣溫再持繼上升, 會造成海底毒氣大量噴出, 地球物種滅絕.

而造成全球暖化最大的原因則是因肉食大量養殖動物

科學家找到2.51億年前『物種大滅絕』罪魁禍首 2007.11.27

http://tech.big5.enorth.com.cn/system/2007/11/27/002399340.shtml (中)
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/11/071126-mass-extinction_2.html (英 English)

加利福尼亞大學大衛·博特傑是此項研究的合作者之一，他指出，低氧氣含量、高二氧化碳和高硫化氫氣體指數，海洋已成為『施放毒液的巫婆』。凱瑟琳強調稱，而大氣層和海洋總是休戚相關互相作用的。從海洋釋放出的硫化氫氣體融入大氣層，殺死了陸地大多數動物。同時，現今的地球氣候轉暖現象到達一個什麼樣的水平能夠引發像2.51億年前全球生態危機，這一點我沒有把握預測。

生物大滅絕另有真凶！ 科學人雜誌2006年11月號　
http://dbnet.ncl.edu.tw/saweb/read.asp?readtype=ch&docsn=2006112966
他們的研究指出，二疊紀末期這種海水湧升流產生的硫化氫，足以使陸地與海洋生物的滅絕。 至於下一次溫室滅絕會多快發生？將是世人永遠無法回答的問題。

海底噴發有毒氣體危及魚類生存 2004-02-09
http://www.hf365.com/epublish/gb/paper2/20040101/class000200008/hwz407693.htm

海底“無魚區”揭秘 2004-07-09
http://www.cdht.gov.cn/Detail.php?id=626&Mylan=big5

改變生活方式 有助減緩全球暖化

（法新社巴黎十五日電）曾獲諾貝爾獎殊榮的聯合國氣候變遷科學研究小組領導人今天表示，不吃肉、騎腳踏車、少消費，就可以協助遏止全球暖化。政府間氣候變遷問題小組（IPCC）領導人帕卓里在巴黎記者會上指出，他們去年公佈的報告強調「改變生活方式的重要性」。他說：「這是IPCC早先不敢表達，不過現在公諸於世的概念。」這位吃素的印度籍經濟學家呼籲全球民眾，抑制食肉的衝動。他說：「請少吃些肉，肉是排碳量高度密集的商品。」並表示食用大量肉類對健康有害無益。

研究顯示，生產一公斤的肉，會排放三十六點四公斤的二氧化碳。　此外，畜養和運送一公斤牛肉、羊肉和豬肉所消耗的能源，相當於點亮一個一百瓦的燈泡將近三個星期。帕卓里列舉人們所能貢獻抑制暖化的做法時，讚揚巴黎和其他法國城市提供的公共腳踏車租借系統，是一項「美好發展」。

他在記者會上告訴記者：「如果我們以騎腳踏車或走路，代替跳上車子行駛五百公尺，將會造成莫大的不同。」他並表示，不要「只因商品隨手可及」就消費，也是一種能夠協助減緩暖化的方式。他並敦促消費者只做真正必須的消費。

新聞出處：http://news.yam.com/afp/life/200801/20080116244172.html


Lifestyle changes can curb climate change: IPCC chief

PARIS (AFP) — Don't eat meat, ride a bike, and be a frugal shopper -- that's how you can help brake global warming, the head of the United Nation's Nobel Prize-winning scientific panel on climate change said Tuesday.

Read full news here: http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5iIVBkZpOUA9Hz3Xc2u-61mDlrw0Q