• 3 minutes e-car sales collapse
  • 6 minutes America Is Exceptional in Its Political Divide
  • 11 minutes Perovskites, a ‘dirt cheap’ alternative to silicon, just got a lot more efficient
  • 35 mins GREEN NEW DEAL = BLIZZARD OF LIES
  • 7 days The United States produced more crude oil than any nation, at any time.
  • 1 day e-truck insanity
  • 7 days How Far Have We Really Gotten With Alternative Energy
  • 7 days China deletes leaked stats showing plunging birth rate for 2023
  • 8 days The European Union is exceptional in its political divide. Examples are apparent in Hungary, Slovakia, Sweden, Netherlands, Belarus, Ireland, etc.
  • 5 days Bad news for e-cars keeps coming
Citi Forecasts Oil Price Drop to $60s by 2025

Citi Forecasts Oil Price Drop to $60s by 2025

Citi predicts that oil prices…

British Banks Have Abandoned North Sea Oil

British Banks Have Abandoned North Sea Oil

Virtually all British banks have…

Irina Slav

Irina Slav

Irina is a writer for Oilprice.com with over a decade of experience writing on the oil and gas industry.

More Info

Premium Content

Australian Pet Owners Could Face Controversial Carbon Tax

Woof!

A former Australian energy and resources minister has proposed a carbon tax for pets—an idea that is as rational as it will no doubt be controversial.

“They might be furry and they might be cute, but they do have a carbon footprint and an environmental cost,” former minister Theo Theophanus told Australian 3AW693.

“Everybody wants us to address the climate issue, but they don’t want to address it personally and in their own use of resources on the planet,” he added, saying a carbon tax on pets could raise between US$68 and US$103 million (A$100-150 million).

While Theophanus’s proposal would certainly sound heartless to anyone who has ever owned a pet, he does have a point. Like people, cats and dogs—and other pets as well—also have a carbon pawprint.

Back in 2017, a study revealed that cats and dogs are responsible for as much as a quarter of the emissions produced by animal agriculture. That’s 64 million tons of carbon dioxide equivalent that accompanies the production of pet food. This is about the same amount driving 13 million cars would produce.

What’s more, researchers stipulated that the larger the animal, the larger its carbon pawprint, meaning bigger dogs cause more emissions than smaller breeds and cats. Still, the researchers also noted that there is no conclusive evidence to suggest that dog ownership is any worse for the environment than other, pet-free lifestyle choices.

"Further research in this area would be beneficial before making environmental recommendations about dog ownership to the public," they said at the time. "Still, we would suggest with some confidence that a smaller dog is likely to have a smaller carbon footprint than a larger dog."

This is because cats and dogs eat meat, and the process of bringing this meat to the can is associated with a lot of emissions, from the clearing of land to raise livestock, which sometimes involves excessive deforestation, to raising the livestock, and to processing the meat. A kilo of pork takes 24 kilos of CO2 and a kilo of beef takes as much as 1,000 kilos of CO2. Certainly food for thought for pet owners.

By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com

ADVERTISEMENT

More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:


Download The Free Oilprice App Today

Back to homepage





Leave a comment

Leave a comment




EXXON Mobil -0.35
Open57.81 Trading Vol.6.96M Previous Vol.241.7B
BUY 57.15
Sell 57.00
Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News