6 ms·

Considerably more water is used to raise cattle than plants. And then the plants that they feed on also need water.

TACIXAT 7y ago
Efficiency isn't really an argument that is going to get people to change their preferences. Case in point, Electron apps. Even if beef becomes the Electron of the food world, you know a ton of people are still going to consume it.
- moreranchplease 7y ago
  You don't think water shortages will change people's preferences?
  - seisvelas 7y ago
    No. I live in Mexico City, where it is not unheard of for the government to outright cut off the city water supply for days to account for shortages. People's preferences haven't changed. Beef continues to be very popular, as do public fountains. The choice not to consume meat (at least here) is mostly associated with pretentious, upperclass people who like yoga and are keenly interested in social justice (there is even a word for this type of person: fresas, which literally means strawberries but here means, well, that type of person). Eating or not eating meat is more about adopting cultural, class, and identity signifiers than any real correlation with the local water situation.
    - defterGoose 7y ago
      So what you're saying is that continuing your current beef consumption is a neutral activity, while trying to cut back due to environmental impact is simply virtue signalling? Maybe the people trying to cut back are ahead of the curve. Maybe those people realize that if the worst effects of climate change and population growth come to pass, that cutting back now could mean the impact on beef supply in the future is mitigated. I guess, in that case, the "unpretentious, lower class people who hate yoga" would have those tree huggers to thank. Peoples' preference for war hasn't changed either (most people don't want it), but we still find ourselves in conflict at every turn. That's because you can't go too long without confronting the objective physical reality of scarcity of resources.
      - dsalso 7y ago
        Thank you for prolonging my enjoyment of meat then! I now feel like the celebrities promoting cutting back on greenhouse gas emissions while flying private jets all over the world. At least someone is getting to enjoy themselves.
      - seisvelas 7y ago
        >is simply virtue signalling No, more like life style participation. >I guess, in that case, the "unpretentious, lower class people who hate yoga" would have those tree huggers to thank. We need many countries to make national-level policies about this. The Instagram people are a smug drop in the bucket. >we still find ourselves in conflict at every turn. That's because you can't go too long without confronting the objective physical reality of scarcity of resources. That correlation seems made up. Has there been an increase of scarcity-driven wars? Most wartorn places don't seem to be resource scarce.
    - flagfeedingusa1 7y ago
      >The choice not to consume meat (at least here) is mostly associated with pretentious, upperclass people who like yoga and are keenly interested in social justice Believe me it's the same here. Rich pretentious people that post here rarely step out of their bubble, but if they did for five seconds they'd realize there are still real people struggling and the idea of cutting meat out or raising the prices via a tax to get people to eat less is outrageous.
- wcoenen 7y ago
  Higher efficiency should eventually result in a lower price, as mentioned in the article. Prices do affect consumer behavior.
  - TACIXAT 7y ago
    Give me insect protein or give me death!

Efficiency isn't really an argument that is going to get people to change their preferences. Case in point, Electron apps. Even if beef becomes the Electron of the food world, you know a ton of people are still going to consume it.

moreranchplease 7y ago
You don't think water shortages will change people's preferences?
- seisvelas 7y ago
  No. I live in Mexico City, where it is not unheard of for the government to outright cut off the city water supply for days to account for shortages. People's preferences haven't changed. Beef continues to be very popular, as do public fountains. The choice not to consume meat (at least here) is mostly associated with pretentious, upperclass people who like yoga and are keenly interested in social justice (there is even a word for this type of person: fresas, which literally means strawberries but here means, well, that type of person). Eating or not eating meat is more about adopting cultural, class, and identity signifiers than any real correlation with the local water situation.
  - defterGoose 7y ago
    So what you're saying is that continuing your current beef consumption is a neutral activity, while trying to cut back due to environmental impact is simply virtue signalling? Maybe the people trying to cut back are ahead of the curve. Maybe those people realize that if the worst effects of climate change and population growth come to pass, that cutting back now could mean the impact on beef supply in the future is mitigated. I guess, in that case, the "unpretentious, lower class people who hate yoga" would have those tree huggers to thank. Peoples' preference for war hasn't changed either (most people don't want it), but we still find ourselves in conflict at every turn. That's because you can't go too long without confronting the objective physical reality of scarcity of resources.
    - dsalso 7y ago
      Thank you for prolonging my enjoyment of meat then! I now feel like the celebrities promoting cutting back on greenhouse gas emissions while flying private jets all over the world. At least someone is getting to enjoy themselves.
    - seisvelas 7y ago
      >is simply virtue signalling No, more like life style participation. >I guess, in that case, the "unpretentious, lower class people who hate yoga" would have those tree huggers to thank. We need many countries to make national-level policies about this. The Instagram people are a smug drop in the bucket. >we still find ourselves in conflict at every turn. That's because you can't go too long without confronting the objective physical reality of scarcity of resources. That correlation seems made up. Has there been an increase of scarcity-driven wars? Most wartorn places don't seem to be resource scarce.
  - flagfeedingusa1 7y ago
    >The choice not to consume meat (at least here) is mostly associated with pretentious, upperclass people who like yoga and are keenly interested in social justice Believe me it's the same here. Rich pretentious people that post here rarely step out of their bubble, but if they did for five seconds they'd realize there are still real people struggling and the idea of cutting meat out or raising the prices via a tax to get people to eat less is outrageous.
wcoenen 7y ago
Higher efficiency should eventually result in a lower price, as mentioned in the article. Prices do affect consumer behavior.
- TACIXAT 7y ago
  Give me insect protein or give me death!