i'm certainly willing to read any study you can present. this study relies almost entirely on poore-nemecek 2018, which combined LCA data gathered with disparate methodologies, and did so against the guidance of the LCA studies themselves. it's garbage. it's not science. writing a study that relies so heavily on that study is also garbage.

Are you going to claim they all suffer from the same flawed methodology? Do you also believe that climate change is a hoax?

Bring your counterpoints, not personal accusations.