2 ms·

> the cost of meat should be priced to also cover external costs of water and harm to the environment I think that should apply to everything, and not just mea

by Zababa 5y ago

> the cost of meat should be priced to also cover external costs of water and harm to the environment I think that should apply to everything, and not just meat. Air travel, vegetables, plastic, you name it. > I think that there should be a tax on meat that directly supported research and infrastructure for water and energy efficient farming, lower cost desalinization, etc. I don't agree with that. As long as you pay the full cost of everything, adding a tax over it seems unfair to me. > In some ways I think that “meat hurting the environment deniers” are even a little worse than climate change deniers because industrial meat production hits chaotic climate change and water resources. I think you're oversimplifying things. For example, nuts use a lot of water. More than sheep, goat, pig and chicken according to this https://www.statista.com/chart/9483/how-thirsty-is-our-food/ https://www.statista.com/chart/9483/how-thirsty-is-our-food/. Vegetarians and vegans both consume more nuts than omnivores (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5707691/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5707691/). We should take that into account to. I also wonder, how much of the water consumed by animals is just rainwater on non-arable land? Animals put on land where you can't grow anything but grass anyways is a smart utilisation of resources. Animals put on land where you could grow cereals, vegetables, or legumes is a waste. Having a way to make the distinction between the two when buying meat would be great.

amacneil 5y ago
Nuts definitely consume a lot of water, but your usage link compares per kg. When you adjust for calories it tells a different story, e.g. Almonds [0] have around 3x more calories per kg than Steak [1]. [0] https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-details/323294/nutrients https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-details/323294/n... [1] https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-details/746763/nutrients https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-details/746763/n...
- Zababa 5y ago
  You're right, comparing just the weight doesn't tell the whole story. However, the same is true for calories. I think you should consider a kg of "weighted average" beef and not just steak, as steak tends to be lean. You would also have to take into account nutrients. That's why I'm not a huge fan of just comparing how much water different food need. Things are more complex than that.
  - amacneil 5y ago
    Agreed - I think it would be better to just compare an overall diet of someone eating more plants vs less plants, then sum up their water usage. I’d have a hard time believing that overall eating fewer animals resulted in higher water usage (since those animals had to eat plants to grow), but would be interesting to see data on it.
    - Zababa 5y ago
      > Agreed - I think it would be better to just compare an overall diet of someone eating more plants vs less plants, then sum up their water usage. I agree, that would be a better way to compare diets. > I’d have a hard time believing that overall eating fewer animals resulted in higher water usage (since those animals had to eat plants to grow), but would be interesting to see data on it. I agree too, but I don't think water falling from the sky on non-arable land is the same as using potable water for agriculture. I think those two should be counted separately.
- ephbit 5y ago
  IMO the criterion to compare by should be protein content (also taking into account the https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_value https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_value) rather than calories. For most people suffering from malnutrition worldwide their biggest problem probably isn't getting enough calories but rather getting enough protein and vitamins and so on. Getting calories in the rich countries is more of an anti problem. Many people take in too many calories, because there's too little protein in the foods they eat (so they have to eat more of it, giving them too many calories). Protein dilution.
- deepnotderp 5y ago
  Now do water per gram of complete protein

by Zababa 5y ago

amacneil 5y ago

Nuts definitely consume a lot of water, but your usage link compares per kg. When you adjust for calories it tells a different story, e.g. Almonds [0] have around 3x more calories per kg than Steak [1]. [0] https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-details/323294/nutrients https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-details/323294/n... [1] https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-details/746763/nutrients https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-details/746763/n...

Zababa 5y ago
You're right, comparing just the weight doesn't tell the whole story. However, the same is true for calories. I think you should consider a kg of "weighted average" beef and not just steak, as steak tends to be lean. You would also have to take into account nutrients. That's why I'm not a huge fan of just comparing how much water different food need. Things are more complex than that.
- amacneil 5y ago
  Agreed - I think it would be better to just compare an overall diet of someone eating more plants vs less plants, then sum up their water usage. I’d have a hard time believing that overall eating fewer animals resulted in higher water usage (since those animals had to eat plants to grow), but would be interesting to see data on it.
  - Zababa 5y ago
    > Agreed - I think it would be better to just compare an overall diet of someone eating more plants vs less plants, then sum up their water usage. I agree, that would be a better way to compare diets. > I’d have a hard time believing that overall eating fewer animals resulted in higher water usage (since those animals had to eat plants to grow), but would be interesting to see data on it. I agree too, but I don't think water falling from the sky on non-arable land is the same as using potable water for agriculture. I think those two should be counted separately.
ephbit 5y ago
IMO the criterion to compare by should be protein content (also taking into account the https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_value https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_value) rather than calories. For most people suffering from malnutrition worldwide their biggest problem probably isn't getting enough calories but rather getting enough protein and vitamins and so on. Getting calories in the rich countries is more of an anti problem. Many people take in too many calories, because there's too little protein in the foods they eat (so they have to eat more of it, giving them too many calories). Protein dilution.
deepnotderp 5y ago
Now do water per gram of complete protein