3 ms·
Animals are lossy at converting plant calories into meat calories (varies for different kinds of livestock obviously). I don’t think it’s an obvious conclusion
by waterbadger 6y ago
Animals are lossy at converting plant calories into meat calories (varies for different kinds of livestock obviously). I don’t think it’s an obvious conclusion that more agricultural land would be required.
- fooker 6y agoMost agriculture is only feasible in fertile lands. A majority of modern agriculture happens in river valleys once occupied by rainforests. In comparison, animal rearing is feasible in pretty desolate places as long as you can transport feed and water. Just claiming it's a lossy energy conversion is pretty irrelevant. Not all the 'calories' here are created equal.
- jgwil2 6y agoWhere do you think the feed comes from?
- fooker 6y agoDid you get the impression that I am speaking for abolishing agriculture? To answer your question, almost anything will do as feed. Byproducts of agriculture, grasslands, processed/filtered organic waste. Animals will thrive on rotten meat too -- famously leading to the mad cow disease.
- jgwil2 6y agoFunny that you cite diseased animals as evidence of thriving.