12 ms·
The point about cattle taking 25 calories in grass to produce 1 calorie of meat is true but in most places, those cattle get their nutrition from grazing grassl
by 10u152 5y ago
The point about cattle taking 25 calories in grass to produce 1 calorie of meat is true but in most places, those cattle get their nutrition from grazing grassland that has no arable value. The grass grows with no human intervention and they wander around and feed themselves. Humans can’t eat grass. So it’s not really “inefficient” in that sense.
- debo_ 5y agoDo you know what percentage of total meat production is represented by pasture-sustained animals? Because my understanding is that it is very small.
- 0_____0 5y agomy understanding is that most cattle are fed on a combo of both. on pasture initially then moved to feedlot later in the process to fatten up
- Zababa 5y agoIn France that's ~70% of what cattle eats. I feel like most of the information about things like that is very USA-centric.
- kova12 5y agoNo matter how small %% it is, lab meat is not grazing at all
- missedthecue 5y ago93% of a beef cattle's lifetime diet consists of food that is not in direct competition with the human food supply, such as grasses or agricultural waste (cornstalks and such). https://extension.okstate.edu/fact-sheets/print-publications/afs/corn-as-cattle-feed-vs-human-food-afs-3296.pdf https://extension.okstate.edu/fact-sheets/print-publications... pdf warning
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- kjksf 5y agoCorn doesn't fall from the sky into pigs mouth. The land that grows corn to feed pigs could grow things that humans can eat, so it is in direct competition with human food supply. Or it could be bio-diverse land or forest where we have owls, foxes, deers and thousands of other animals, not just bugs.
- missedthecue 5y agoCorn is grown to feed humans, the humans eat the corn, but not the corn stalks. The corn stalks are fed to cows and pigs. There is no competition there.
- xdennis 5y agoIt's not competition. We eat the pigs too.
- dudus 5y agoReference needed for (in most places). I always heard most cattle is fed grain and have no access to pasture.
- s0rce 5y agoI've wondered about this since so much alfalfa and corn are specifically grown on arable land to feed cattle. What fraction of beef calories is derived from non-arable grazing lands? There is also the extensive use of water to irrigate pasture in arid areas just to feed cattle. That water could be used more efficiently. to grow food directly.
- mmiyer 5y ago97% of cattle is grown on feedlots, not grass [1]. So massive amounts of corn and soy are wasted (as the original article notes growing soy for cattle feed leads to massive amounts of deforestation) 1. https://www.nrdc.org/resources/feedlot-operations-why-it-matters https://www.nrdc.org/resources/feedlot-operations-why-it-mat...
- Zababa 5y ago97% of the cattle is grown on feedlots, not grass IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. So massive amounts of corn and soy are wasted IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (as the original article THAT EXCLUSIVELY TALKS ABOUT THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA notes growing soy for cattle feed leads to massiva amounts of deforestation)
- manux 5y ago...and the USA is a large country of >300M people. It must lead in humanity's work towards reducing GHG. What is your point exactly?
- deworms 5y agoThis is a variation of the paternising "white man's burden" myth.
- manux 5y agoI fail to see how this is the case, but perhaps I'm missing the point you're trying to make? What you're referring to is about colonialism, whereas here the USA is very much incentivized to work within its own borders, on its own food industry. It just so happens that climate change is a global problem as well, and the USA being a large rich country it has more causal influence on the outcome of climate change.
- pessimizer 5y agoNo it's not. The US must lead in reducing environmental destruction and emissions because it leads in producing environmental destruction and emissions (per capita.)
- rvense 5y agoI'm guessing you're talking about America? 50% of the surface area of Denmark is dedicated to growing feed for pigs, and we import a lot as well. All that land could be used for growing food for people directly, or for other things. Since there's basically nowhere in this country where you're more than five kilometers away from some sort of settlement, almost all of it is interesting for other developments as well. So at least here, some of us would very much like agriculture to change.
- pengaru 5y agoIn the US there's endless fields of corn grown to feed livestock.
- mcguire 5y agoCurrently, technically, no. Most of the corn fed to livestock is the remains left after distillation for alcohol.
- pengaru 5y ago[citation needed] Here's mine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corn_production_in_the_United_States#Production https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corn_production_in_the_United_... 33% livestock feed, 27% ethanol, 11% "other" (which includes beverage alcohol according to the above link)
- mcguire 5y agoThat Wikipedia page is weird. The paragraph reports it as the corn production for 2019 but the link says it was retrieved in 2014. The current page has no numbers (but a video). A link to https://www.iowacorn.org/corn-production/production/ https://www.iowacorn.org/corn-production/production/ shows (for Iowa corn), 44% ethanol/fuel, 25% feed, 18% exports, 4% food and industrial. I was referring to another commenter's: https://extension.okstate.edu/fact-sheets/print-publications/afs/corn-as-cattle-feed-vs-human-food-afs-3296.pdf https://extension.okstate.edu/fact-sheets/print-publications... 2015, of course.