4 ms·
>Why? It's perfectly productive once you let some goats on that land and then eat the goats. Because it isn't needed for food production anymore. >If your arg
by sanswork 10y ago
>Why? It's perfectly productive once you let some goats on that land and then eat the goats.
Because it isn't needed for food production anymore.
>If your argument against meat is waste
My argument against meat isn't waste. Less waste is a benefit but not a primary reason.
>You're missing the point, which is that we're by necessity creating all this other material that can be used to feed animals as a necessary byproduct of creating the grains to feed the animals.
I've read this a few times and I keep reading it the same way "We produce waste that can be used to feed animals as a bitproduct of producing feed for animals?"
>Pasture raised livestock is a thing, and requires less capital and investment.
And tons more cleared grassland. Like an unsustainable amount.
- jimmywanger 10y ago> I've read this a few times and I keep reading it the same way "We produce waste that can be used to feed animals as a bitproduct of producing feed for animals? My point is that we don't need to produce feed for animals, they do fine just on pastureland. The way we currently raise grains is problematic enough as it is, requiring huge fertilizer inputs[1] which require petrochemicals. Eating grains is not a sustainable alternative - if we raised grains for human food, might as well feed animals and get some steaks out of it. >And tons more cleared grassland. The great plains did not need to be cleared. They were perfect pastures for grazing animals, not the modern monoculture of grains. [1] (we're running out of phosphorous http://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/2013/04/01/phosphorus-essential-to-life-are-we-running-out/ http://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/2013/04/01/phosphorus-essential...)