Loss of Livelihood for Local Meat Farmers == 

 Currently the last sentence of the environmental section reads "Global warming and climate change could be controlled but at a lost of livelihood for local meat farmers; driving them further into poverty."  Both somewhat argumentative assertions in that sentence are uncited.  A Nov. 17th NY Times article mentions forthcoming research that finds that GHG emissions will be reduced by 90% as compared with traditional livestock production methods.  Is there a citation to the second half of the sentence?  There are a lot of solid reasons to oppose in vitro meat, but that statement is a 'hooey' argument, IMHO. First of all, local farmers  produce only a fraction of the meat, agribusiness corps produce the rest.  Second, there isn't any evidence it is going to put local farmers out of business considering the huge growing demand for meat.  Third, even if it were true, it'd be a bit like arguing that in 1915 that cars are a bad idea because it puts horse drawn carriage operators out of business. Unless someone can find a citation, I'm inclined to remove the second half of the sentence.  If there is valid support for this argument, perhaps it can be moved to the economic section rather than the environmental section.     

 ==