5 ms·

It's terrible news for the environment. In terms of environmental harm, vegetable farming is easily the most environmentally damaging human endeavor. The distan

It's terrible news for the environment. In terms of environmental harm, vegetable farming is easily the most environmentally damaging human endeavor. The distant second is raising livestock. The most environmentally friendly method for humans would be the "hunter gatherer" diet ( wild vegetation and wild animals ). But we might be too populous for that to work. If you care about the environment, this is the worst news. You essentially have to farm one plant ( either grain or corn or soy ) to feed livestock for your burger. How many different types of plants have to be planted to produce a single burger? And of course, most of those plants can't be raised in frigid canada so they'll have to destroy the environment elsewhere. Not to mention plants are nutrient deficient and as a result people have to eat far more of it which means more farms and more environmental destruction. Ever wonder why grazing animals have to eat constantly? It's amazing how PR has convinced people that industrial farming is actually good for the environment and animals. I guess if you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it.

hexane360 8y ago
I'm amazed someone can be so hilariously wrong. ~90% of the calories a species takes in get lost going up the food chain. You need to grow ~1000 calories of plants to make 100 calories of beef. >Not to mention plants are nutrient deficient and as a result people have to eat far more of it Source? Also, what specific nutrients are you referring to? Where do you think the energy and minerals an animal has come from? >The most environmentally friendly method for humans would be the "hunter gatherer" diet ( wild vegetation and wild animals ). But we might be too populous for that to work. Modern agriculture is hands down more efficient. You know this, because you know that it can support more people. By extension, modern agriculture with a small population is more environmentally friendly than "hunter gatherer" with a small population. >You essentially have to farm one plant to feed livestock for your burger. How many different types of plants have to be planted to produce a single burger? More variety but far far far less total quantity. And monoculture farming is much more destructive than farming a variety of plants. There's a reason that farmers rotate corn and soy, even when growing animal feed.
- dilap 8y ago
  Cows eat grass, which is just out there, growing naturally. Those aren't calories humans could be consuming; we don't have the right kind of stomaches. You can view a cow as machine for extracting the nutrients in grass into a dense, human-digestible form. Pretty cool. I'm also not sure your "modern agriculture" point stands -- are industrial farming methods sustainable over the long scale? Think about America pre-colonization: a continent filled with ruminants happily munching away, being hunted at sustainable levels. To my mind that is peak sustainability and environmental friendliness. Whereas a huge environmental problem we have right now is soil depletion, which is largely driven by agriculture. Cows could actually help solve this problem, because their manure contributes to the health of the soil. https://www.ted.com/talks/allan_savory_how_to_green_the_world_s_deserts_and_reverse_climate_change https://www.ted.com/talks/allan_savory_how_to_green_the_worl... It's far from obvious that a veggie burger would be healthier for the environment than eating cows. (Disclaimer: haven't watched the ted talk, but familiar with the ideas and seemed like a good summary to link to.)
  - blacksmith_tb 8y ago
    Maybe it would be better to say "cows would eat grass" but unfortunately >90% of beef comes from cows who don't, and are raised on feed[1]. 1: https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevebanker/2016/01/29/the-grass-fed-beef-supply-chain/#7942a30048e5 https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevebanker/2016/01/29/the-gras...
    - dilap 8y ago
      I think it'd probably be good to stop feeding grain to cows, but even "grain-fed" cows eat grass (or hay) most of their lives -- it's at the end when they're sent to the feed lots to fatten them up that they eat grain.
      - hexane360 8y ago
        "you don't need to grow vast quantities of grain to raise cows, just to increase their biomass enough to feed large quantities of people"
ClassyJacket 8y ago
I want a source for that outrageous claim that the most environmentally damaging human endeavor is growing vegetables. I suspect you being right would turn the world on its head.
- wstrange 8y ago
  Not the GP, and I don't have any conclusions in this matter - but I don't think we can outright dismiss the role of livestock in maintaining a healthy environment. For example: https://ourworld.unu.edu/en/reversing-desertification-with-livestock https://ourworld.unu.edu/en/reversing-desertification-with-l... And many vegetables are fertilized with blood meal, which comes from animals... Perhaps a more nuanced view is needed...
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - tom_mellior 8y ago
    > https://ourworld.unu.edu/en/reversing-desertification-with-livestock https://ourworld.unu.edu/en/reversing-desertification-with-l... That link talks about Allan Savory's work. Savory has a reeeally well-done, convincing-sounding TED talk about this. But unfortunately it looks like many people who know a lot more about this than I do disagree with pretty much everything he says: https://slate.com/human-interest/2013/04/allan-savorys-ted-talk-is-wrong-and-the-benefits-of-holistic-grazing-have-been-debunked.html https://slate.com/human-interest/2013/04/allan-savorys-ted-t... Also, even if keeping livestock is a good idea in some environments, that doesn't mean that farming livestock elsewhere is a similarly good idea.
- easytiger 8y ago
  How many extra plants would you have to grow and use as fertilizer on plants if you didn't have animal fertilizer? Or do you want to rely on non organic farming methods for your plant only ethics based utopia?
  - bildung 8y ago
sridca 8y ago
You didn't break any of HN rules, and yet people downvoted you. It goes to show HN's vegan-bias!

hexane360 8y ago

I'm amazed someone can be so hilariously wrong. ~90% of the calories a species takes in get lost going up the food chain. You need to grow ~1000 calories of plants to make 100 calories of beef. >Not to mention plants are nutrient deficient and as a result people have to eat far more of it Source? Also, what specific nutrients are you referring to? Where do you think the energy and minerals an animal has come from? >The most environmentally friendly method for humans would be the "hunter gatherer" diet ( wild vegetation and wild animals ). But we might be too populous for that to work. Modern agriculture is hands down more efficient. You know this, because you know that it can support more people. By extension, modern agriculture with a small population is more environmentally friendly than "hunter gatherer" with a small population. >You essentially have to farm one plant to feed livestock for your burger. How many different types of plants have to be planted to produce a single burger? More variety but far far far less total quantity. And monoculture farming is much more destructive than farming a variety of plants. There's a reason that farmers rotate corn and soy, even when growing animal feed.

dilap 8y ago
Cows eat grass, which is just out there, growing naturally. Those aren't calories humans could be consuming; we don't have the right kind of stomaches. You can view a cow as machine for extracting the nutrients in grass into a dense, human-digestible form. Pretty cool. I'm also not sure your "modern agriculture" point stands -- are industrial farming methods sustainable over the long scale? Think about America pre-colonization: a continent filled with ruminants happily munching away, being hunted at sustainable levels. To my mind that is peak sustainability and environmental friendliness. Whereas a huge environmental problem we have right now is soil depletion, which is largely driven by agriculture. Cows could actually help solve this problem, because their manure contributes to the health of the soil. https://www.ted.com/talks/allan_savory_how_to_green_the_world_s_deserts_and_reverse_climate_change https://www.ted.com/talks/allan_savory_how_to_green_the_worl... It's far from obvious that a veggie burger would be healthier for the environment than eating cows. (Disclaimer: haven't watched the ted talk, but familiar with the ideas and seemed like a good summary to link to.)
- blacksmith_tb 8y ago
  Maybe it would be better to say "cows would eat grass" but unfortunately >90% of beef comes from cows who don't, and are raised on feed[1]. 1: https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevebanker/2016/01/29/the-grass-fed-beef-supply-chain/#7942a30048e5 https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevebanker/2016/01/29/the-gras...
  - dilap 8y ago
    I think it'd probably be good to stop feeding grain to cows, but even "grain-fed" cows eat grass (or hay) most of their lives -- it's at the end when they're sent to the feed lots to fatten them up that they eat grain.
    - hexane360 8y ago
      "you don't need to grow vast quantities of grain to raise cows, just to increase their biomass enough to feed large quantities of people"

ClassyJacket 8y ago

I want a source for that outrageous claim that the most environmentally damaging human endeavor is growing vegetables. I suspect you being right would turn the world on its head.

wstrange 8y ago
Not the GP, and I don't have any conclusions in this matter - but I don't think we can outright dismiss the role of livestock in maintaining a healthy environment. For example: https://ourworld.unu.edu/en/reversing-desertification-with-livestock https://ourworld.unu.edu/en/reversing-desertification-with-l... And many vegetables are fertilized with blood meal, which comes from animals... Perhaps a more nuanced view is needed...
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- tom_mellior 8y ago
  > https://ourworld.unu.edu/en/reversing-desertification-with-livestock https://ourworld.unu.edu/en/reversing-desertification-with-l... That link talks about Allan Savory's work. Savory has a reeeally well-done, convincing-sounding TED talk about this. But unfortunately it looks like many people who know a lot more about this than I do disagree with pretty much everything he says: https://slate.com/human-interest/2013/04/allan-savorys-ted-talk-is-wrong-and-the-benefits-of-holistic-grazing-have-been-debunked.html https://slate.com/human-interest/2013/04/allan-savorys-ted-t... Also, even if keeping livestock is a good idea in some environments, that doesn't mean that farming livestock elsewhere is a similarly good idea.
easytiger 8y ago
How many extra plants would you have to grow and use as fertilizer on plants if you didn't have animal fertilizer? Or do you want to rely on non organic farming methods for your plant only ethics based utopia?
- bildung 8y ago

sridca 8y ago

You didn't break any of HN rules, and yet people downvoted you. It goes to show HN's vegan-bias!