Best Environmental Causes to Donate to

[EquALLity]

Don't donate to greenpeace.

How about the Good Food Institute? Since they focus on developing meat alternatives it may be more palatable to carnists.

Thanks for the suggestion, and I will suggest it because it looks like a good charity.

Though, something that focuses on meat alternatives doesn't strike me as something that meat-eaters would immediately react positively too. They focus on both clean meat and plant based alternatives, so that looks good.

Again though, this isn't an animal rights club, so if you have a more overtly environmentalist organization, that would be good.

[miniboes]

Again though, this isn't an animal rights club, so if you have a more overtly environmentalist organization, that would be good.

The only non-harmful environmental charity I know of is the breakthrough institute:
http://thebreakthrough.org/
It's an ecomodernist thinktank.

Breakthrough’s unique approach is rooted in a positive, optimistic paradigm called ecomodernism, which embraces modernity to leave more room for nature and expand human prosperity. Breakthrough advances the ecomodernist paradigm in three main ways: research, communications, and network-building. Our research is designed to illuminate pathways to “decouple” the link between human development and environmental destruction. Our communications work, which includes our website and the Breakthrough Journal, advances a positive vision of our environmental future grounded in real-world trends. Our network-building work takes multiple forms: Breakthrough convenes a broad-based, ideologically diverse group of scholars, experts, and policy makers to engage in robust discussion and debate, particularly at our annual event, the Breakthrough Dialogue. We also run Breakthrough Generation, a 10-week research fellowship that prepares young scholars to tackle the big challenges of the 21st century.

[EquALLity]

Again though, this isn't an animal rights club, so if you have a more overtly environmentalist organization, that would be good.

The only non-harmful environmental charity I know of is the breakthrough institute:
http://thebreakthrough.org/
It's an ecomodernist thinktank.

Breakthrough’s unique approach is rooted in a positive, optimistic paradigm called ecomodernism, which embraces modernity to leave more room for nature and expand human prosperity. Breakthrough advances the ecomodernist paradigm in three main ways: research, communications, and network-building. Our research is designed to illuminate pathways to “decouple” the link between human development and environmental destruction. Our communications work, which includes our website and the Breakthrough Journal, advances a positive vision of our environmental future grounded in real-world trends. Our network-building work takes multiple forms: Breakthrough convenes a broad-based, ideologically diverse group of scholars, experts, and policy makers to engage in robust discussion and debate, particularly at our annual event, the Breakthrough Dialogue. We also run Breakthrough Generation, a 10-week research fellowship that prepares young scholars to tackle the big challenges of the 21st century.

Thanks, I'll look into that.

How is WWF harmful though?

[brimstoneSalad]

Not sure where you got meat from.

Pizza is normally covered in meat.

I could try to sway them away from a pizza sale/bake sale, but that's really not in my control.

If they did that, I would not participate. The nominal charity they may contribute to is not going to offset the harm of the pizza sale.

Mercy for Animals is a good organization, but it's overtly against meat. I could suggest it, but it's not necessarily going to happen.

It's not overly against meat, they might just be offended by them recommending reduction in meat consumption.
Good food institute is safer, since they're researching alternatives.

I think it'd be better to give to a non-profit. Something that spreads awareness or directly helps the planet seems more productive than research to me.

Research does help the world, by creating new technologies.

You probably won't find anything they'll agree with in terms of non-profits, so it will be a waste of money. Most environmental organizations range from ineffective to counterproductive. It would be better to burn the money than to give it to most of them.
There are charities that educate on important things like nuclear power:
http://www.nuclearinst.com/charity (that's the first that came up for me, I don't know much about them)
Or educating on genetic engineering:
https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/

But chances are the brain-dead pseudo-environmentalists will veto those ideas.

Research is probably the only thing you'll be able to find that's actually somewhat useful and that the other students are more likely to agree with.

Frankly, I would just stay out of it. It's going to end up taking a lot of time and end up doing more harm than good.

[EquALLity]

Pizza is normally covered in meat.

You mean pepperoni? I don't think there would be pepperoni.

If they did that, I would not participate. The nominal charity they may contribute to is not going to offset the harm of the pizza sale.

Pizza or bake sale. And I'm not trying to sway them to do it. But if they do do it, I'm trying to come up with a good cause to donate the money to.

It's not overly against meat, they might just be offended by them recommending reduction in meat consumption.
Good food institute is safer, since they're researching alternatives.

Well, yeah.
I'll bring it up, I'm just saying it might not work.

Research does help the world, by creating new technologies.

You probably won't find anything they'll agree with in terms of non-profits, so it will be a waste of money. Most environmental organizations range from ineffective to counterproductive. It would be better to burn the money than to give it to most of them.
There are charities that educate on important things like nuclear power:
http://www.nuclearinst.com/charity (that's the first that came up for me, I don't know much about them)
Or educating on genetic engineering:
https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/

But chances are the brain-dead pseudo-environmentalists will veto those ideas.

Research is probably the only thing you'll be able to find that's actually somewhat useful and that the other students are more likely to agree with.

Frankly, I would just stay out of it. It's going to end up taking a lot of time and end up doing more harm than good.

Haha. People can be educated, you know.
It's just that when you start talking about meat you can get people really defensive for some reason. I don't think nuclear energy and GMOs are like that... But nuclear energy and GMOs aren't the only things that help with climate change.

[brimstoneSalad]

You mean pepperoni? I don't think there would be pepperoni.

Or sausage, or "meat lover's". In the very least pepperoni is standard. Most sales will in the minimum have cheese and pepperoni options.

Haha. People can be educated, you know.

It's not easy, and it takes a lot of patience.
You can try.

It's just that when you start talking about meat you can get people really defensive for some reason. I don't think nuclear energy and GMOs are like that... But nuclear energy and GMOs aren't the only things that help with climate change.

Nuclear power and GMO aren't the only things.... reduction in animal products is important too.
There's not really anything else on that level, so if you can't push for one of those three, I would call it a loss and move on.

The problem with ineffective pseudo-charities is it makes people think they're doing something good, when they're really doing something at best nearly useless and more likely harmful. Charities and causes compete, so bad causes absorbing a portion of human charity come at a cost for meaningful ones. People fill their "giving quotas" and feel good about themselves, and then go on to be complacent hedonists after they give -- you have to make sure it counts and that you aren't just selling them meaningless indulgences.