3 ms·

How could that conversion work while respecting the second law? Here’s a good breakdown on the subject: https://stanfordmag.org/contents/can-vegetarianism-sa

How could that conversion work while respecting the second law? Here’s a good breakdown on the subject: https://stanfordmag.org/contents/can-vegetarianism-save-the-world-nitty-gritty https://stanfordmag.org/contents/can-vegetarianism-save-the-...

Nasrudith 6y ago
Factory farms help with the numbers. You can keep pigs more dense even if they don't depend upon the area for the source of feed - just like humans and urban density. A high density in 1 acre ks perfectly plauisble but it ignores the feed crop acres. At that point efficency should be total crop calories * pig efficency margin (10% for standard trophic level to back of the envelope) / (acres of corn + acres of pig). If you took the density scale to something really absurd the pig acre efficiency would be the crop times the multiplier as that space converges eventually converges to becomes negligible and just "pig efficency * feed crop calorie/acre" effectively. Granted the effective convergence point may not be realistic without real world data but if factory farms are big enough it comes out to the same order of magnitude as brocoli about 1.5 vs 2. Of course there are a lot of other things to legitimagely object to about said arrangement but it surpringly lines up to be comparable to vegetable crops in caloric efficiency. A more in depth answer would look at the caloric share of diets in consumption - most people don't get their bulk calories from vegetables.
- filoeleven 6y ago
  > If you took the density scale to something really absurd... > Of course there are a lot of other things to legitimagely object to about said arrangement... The sad reality is that the density scale at pig factory farms is already well past morally objectionable territory if you are concerned at all about animal welfare. I’ve linked resources on this before and can do so again if desired, it’s horrible stuff. Pigs are about the same as dogs in their sentience and even suitability as a pet. I don’t see how one can justify caring for a dog as a pet and also buying factory-farmed pork once they learn about it. Small farms with better living conditions are arguably more justifiable. I don’t eat animals any more, stopped for different reasons, but being aware plays a role in keeping me from going back.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
randomdata 6y ago
> How could that conversation work while respecting the second law? Well, if you start with 15 million calories worth of corn, feed it to pigs, and you get 3.5 million calories of pork back out, the rest of the energy is exerted to keep the animal alive through its life. The second law is respected. Meanwhile, an equivalent acreage of broccoli only provides 2 million calories, being far less efficient at converting the environment's resources into calories than corn, so it is starting from behind and never makes up for just how efficient corn really is. The second law continues to be respected. If you fed that broccoli to pigs, you might not even get half a million calories of pork back, but that's why we don't feed pigs broccoli. Still no violation of the second law. I am not really sure where you think the violation was meant to occur?
- alex_young 6y ago
  Cherry picking some unproductive crops doesn’t prove your argument against animal agriculture’s impact on climate change. Some actually useful real data: http://www.waldeneffect.org/blog/Calories_per_acre_for_various_foods/ http://www.waldeneffect.org/blog/Calories_per_acre_for_vario...
  - randomdata 6y ago
    > Cherry picking some unproductive crops doesn’t prove your argument It was asked by a previous commenter in the thread to cherry-pick a crop that is less efficient than a cherry-picked animal. It was never meant to prove anything, only to helpfully answer the specific question asked. Trying to change the subject now does nothing to help your cause, which nobody really disagrees with in the first place. Even if you come from a heartfelt place, it is troubling that you did not take the time to read the thread before pushing your agenda. That is not the type of community HN strives to be.
    - alex_young 6y ago
      Your point about corn being really efficient isn’t exactly well substantiated to be honest. I totally agree about civility, but I think it’s a bit disingenuous to be pointing fingers. Have a good night.

Nasrudith 6y ago

Factory farms help with the numbers. You can keep pigs more dense even if they don't depend upon the area for the source of feed - just like humans and urban density. A high density in 1 acre ks perfectly plauisble but it ignores the feed crop acres. At that point efficency should be total crop calories * pig efficency margin (10% for standard trophic level to back of the envelope) / (acres of corn + acres of pig). If you took the density scale to something really absurd the pig acre efficiency would be the crop times the multiplier as that space converges eventually converges to becomes negligible and just "pig efficency * feed crop calorie/acre" effectively. Granted the effective convergence point may not be realistic without real world data but if factory farms are big enough it comes out to the same order of magnitude as brocoli about 1.5 vs 2. Of course there are a lot of other things to legitimagely object to about said arrangement but it surpringly lines up to be comparable to vegetable crops in caloric efficiency. A more in depth answer would look at the caloric share of diets in consumption - most people don't get their bulk calories from vegetables.

filoeleven 6y ago
> If you took the density scale to something really absurd... > Of course there are a lot of other things to legitimagely object to about said arrangement... The sad reality is that the density scale at pig factory farms is already well past morally objectionable territory if you are concerned at all about animal welfare. I’ve linked resources on this before and can do so again if desired, it’s horrible stuff. Pigs are about the same as dogs in their sentience and even suitability as a pet. I don’t see how one can justify caring for a dog as a pet and also buying factory-farmed pork once they learn about it. Small farms with better living conditions are arguably more justifiable. I don’t eat animals any more, stopped for different reasons, but being aware plays a role in keeping me from going back.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

randomdata 6y ago

> How could that conversation work while respecting the second law? Well, if you start with 15 million calories worth of corn, feed it to pigs, and you get 3.5 million calories of pork back out, the rest of the energy is exerted to keep the animal alive through its life. The second law is respected. Meanwhile, an equivalent acreage of broccoli only provides 2 million calories, being far less efficient at converting the environment's resources into calories than corn, so it is starting from behind and never makes up for just how efficient corn really is. The second law continues to be respected. If you fed that broccoli to pigs, you might not even get half a million calories of pork back, but that's why we don't feed pigs broccoli. Still no violation of the second law. I am not really sure where you think the violation was meant to occur?

alex_young 6y ago
Cherry picking some unproductive crops doesn’t prove your argument against animal agriculture’s impact on climate change. Some actually useful real data: http://www.waldeneffect.org/blog/Calories_per_acre_for_various_foods/ http://www.waldeneffect.org/blog/Calories_per_acre_for_vario...
- randomdata 6y ago
  > Cherry picking some unproductive crops doesn’t prove your argument It was asked by a previous commenter in the thread to cherry-pick a crop that is less efficient than a cherry-picked animal. It was never meant to prove anything, only to helpfully answer the specific question asked. Trying to change the subject now does nothing to help your cause, which nobody really disagrees with in the first place. Even if you come from a heartfelt place, it is troubling that you did not take the time to read the thread before pushing your agenda. That is not the type of community HN strives to be.
  - alex_young 6y ago
    Your point about corn being really efficient isn’t exactly well substantiated to be honest. I totally agree about civility, but I think it’s a bit disingenuous to be pointing fingers. Have a good night.