6 ms·

> So the irony is that we could grow more beef and pull carbon out of the air at the same time, only if we cared. I want this desperately to be true as someone

> So the irony is that we could grow more beef and pull carbon out of the air at the same time, only if we cared. I want this desperately to be true as someone who loves meat but everything I've read tells me it's not. There is definitely a nice symbiotic relationship that exists between cows grazing and grasslands but it is significantly more expensive to raise animals this way, and you can raise significantly fewer of them per sq ft. The main issue with cows is methane, not carbon (edit: carbon dioxide*), anyway.

zinclozenge 8y ago
I might be pedantic, but methane is a carbon atom and 4 hydrogen atoms. I assume you meant carbon dioxide.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- wdewind 8y ago
  This is HN, the one place you don't need to apologize for pedantry. Right: I meant carbon dioxide. Made the edit :)
cagenut 8y ago
no the main issue with cows is land-use (the thread topic here), methane is just another way they're really terrible. its a hell of a one-two punch.
DTrejo 8y ago
Salatin’s mob grazing creates soil. It is cheaper to raise them this way because you don’t need to buy corn feed. The cows digest grass well. They do not digest corn well, which means corn fed cows produce methane and get sick, and don’t build the soil (sequestering carbon). Definitely worth watching some YouTube videos and reading about it, it’s pretty fun and interesting.
- wdewind 8y ago
  The problem with mob grazing (and really any kind of similar system) is that you cannot support nearly as many animals per sq ft. in comparison to more industrialized farming. Salatin's solution is to shift a major portion of the work force/economy into making sustainable food. It sounds amazing from a utopian standpoint but is a total fantasy.
  - 49para 8y ago
    Won't the rise of automation result in a lot of people without jobs ? They could start working on sustainable food. Sounds like a win / win.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
  - strainer 8y ago
    Mob grazing does not need more work, and it reportedly needs no fertilizer and less land, and it was noticed years ago - this is how it is clearly fantasy at this stage. The strategy would have transformed existing beef and dairy economics within years of discovery.
vanderZwan 8y ago
> The main issue with cows is methane, not carbon Although objectively it makes the most sense if we all eat less meat or even go vegan (in terms of bang-for-the-buck), from what I understand the methane problem is mostly a result of them not being fed a healthy diet.
- cjrd 8y ago
  Cows are ruminants, so their production of methane is a necessary component of the fermentation that takes place in their digestive track. Also, somewhat surprisingly, "free range grass fed diets" lead to more methane production then cows fed grain diets (factory farmed cows). See https://www.fcrn.org.uk/sites/default/files/project-files/fcrn_gnc_report.pdf https://www.fcrn.org.uk/sites/default/files/project-files/fc...
  - strainer 8y ago
    Grassfed does not necessarily lead to more methane production, it depends on the mix of grass and secondary vegetation, on the grain mix being compared to, and on potential supplements. https://prairiesoilsandcrops.ca/articles/volume-1-3-print.pdf https://prairiesoilsandcrops.ca/articles/volume-1-3-print.pd...
    - notpg 8y ago
      Just reading the article you provided and "Feeding high grain diets to cattle unequivocally lowers the formation of CH4 in the rumen." seems to disagree with what you're saying?
      - strainer 8y ago
        That isolated statement only loosely connects to the over reaching statement which I responded to: the performance of the high grain diet depends on the type of grain. In addition, there are complications. From same section of the article it was picked from : "While increased use of grains in ruminant diets reduces enteric CH4 emissions, there is concern that increased grain production may increase the use of fossil fuels for fertilizer, machinery, and transport, resulting in more greenhouse gas emissions. Grain feeding ignores the importance of ruminants in converting fibrous feeds, unsuitable for human consumption, to high-quality protein sources (i.e. milk and meat). Furthermore, high grain diets can negatively affect cow health due to acidosis. With escalating grain prices, the scope of further increasing the grain content of ruminant diets in Canada is limited" Even ignoring CO2 cost, nutrition, grain availability and all other complications, what is required to show that grass fed diets necessarily lead to more methane output than alternatives - is a comprehensive study of the performance of all dietary options and supplements. I dont think that is setting too high a bar, to avoid arguing on sweeping generalization and loss of context.

zinclozenge 8y ago

I might be pedantic, but methane is a carbon atom and 4 hydrogen atoms. I assume you meant carbon dioxide.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
wdewind 8y ago
This is HN, the one place you don't need to apologize for pedantry. Right: I meant carbon dioxide. Made the edit :)

cagenut 8y ago

no the main issue with cows is land-use (the thread topic here), methane is just another way they're really terrible. its a hell of a one-two punch.

DTrejo 8y ago

Salatin’s mob grazing creates soil. It is cheaper to raise them this way because you don’t need to buy corn feed. The cows digest grass well. They do not digest corn well, which means corn fed cows produce methane and get sick, and don’t build the soil (sequestering carbon). Definitely worth watching some YouTube videos and reading about it, it’s pretty fun and interesting.

wdewind 8y ago
The problem with mob grazing (and really any kind of similar system) is that you cannot support nearly as many animals per sq ft. in comparison to more industrialized farming. Salatin's solution is to shift a major portion of the work force/economy into making sustainable food. It sounds amazing from a utopian standpoint but is a total fantasy.
- 49para 8y ago
  Won't the rise of automation result in a lot of people without jobs ? They could start working on sustainable food. Sounds like a win / win.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- strainer 8y ago
  Mob grazing does not need more work, and it reportedly needs no fertilizer and less land, and it was noticed years ago - this is how it is clearly fantasy at this stage. The strategy would have transformed existing beef and dairy economics within years of discovery.

vanderZwan 8y ago

> The main issue with cows is methane, not carbon Although objectively it makes the most sense if we all eat less meat or even go vegan (in terms of bang-for-the-buck), from what I understand the methane problem is mostly a result of them not being fed a healthy diet.

cjrd 8y ago
Cows are ruminants, so their production of methane is a necessary component of the fermentation that takes place in their digestive track. Also, somewhat surprisingly, "free range grass fed diets" lead to more methane production then cows fed grain diets (factory farmed cows). See https://www.fcrn.org.uk/sites/default/files/project-files/fcrn_gnc_report.pdf https://www.fcrn.org.uk/sites/default/files/project-files/fc...
- strainer 8y ago
  Grassfed does not necessarily lead to more methane production, it depends on the mix of grass and secondary vegetation, on the grain mix being compared to, and on potential supplements. https://prairiesoilsandcrops.ca/articles/volume-1-3-print.pdf https://prairiesoilsandcrops.ca/articles/volume-1-3-print.pd...
  - notpg 8y ago
    Just reading the article you provided and "Feeding high grain diets to cattle unequivocally lowers the formation of CH4 in the rumen." seems to disagree with what you're saying?
    - strainer 8y ago
      That isolated statement only loosely connects to the over reaching statement which I responded to: the performance of the high grain diet depends on the type of grain. In addition, there are complications. From same section of the article it was picked from : "While increased use of grains in ruminant diets reduces enteric CH4 emissions, there is concern that increased grain production may increase the use of fossil fuels for fertilizer, machinery, and transport, resulting in more greenhouse gas emissions. Grain feeding ignores the importance of ruminants in converting fibrous feeds, unsuitable for human consumption, to high-quality protein sources (i.e. milk and meat). Furthermore, high grain diets can negatively affect cow health due to acidosis. With escalating grain prices, the scope of further increasing the grain content of ruminant diets in Canada is limited" Even ignoring CO2 cost, nutrition, grain availability and all other complications, what is required to show that grass fed diets necessarily lead to more methane output than alternatives - is a comprehensive study of the performance of all dietary options and supplements. I dont think that is setting too high a bar, to avoid arguing on sweeping generalization and loss of context.