3 ms·

> It's easy to criticize I agree. But knowing how many kWh went into growing a cow is still a huge improvement. About zero, if it was raised on pasture on land

> It's easy to criticize I agree. But knowing how many kWh went into growing a cow is still a huge improvement. About zero, if it was raised on pasture on land that was already cleared. I don't see that as an improvement. > This is the real flow, describes something genuine & truthful. Your throwaway criticism suggests anything not actively hurting us isnt worth regarding or adding to human cognizance, and there I think we quickly depart. My criticism does not suggest any such thing.

rektide 4y ago
Ask how many farmers do not a single thing for their pasture fed cows. The pasture takes maintenance, the cows take tending & care & health services, then they are transported to a slaughter house, butchered, & packaged. These all have costs, energy costs. Just making the fences to hold them had energy costs: not big ones, but measurable ones. > My criticism does not suggest any such thing. It rather ran roughshod over considering energy & didnt recognize any worth that I could see.... yes it frigging did suggest inputs were irrelevant. Callously & with prejudice. I really dont get you agenda of disregard here. It's weirdly in denial, snubbing rudely. I dont think this energy is the ultimate way of viewing things, but it has value, it'a worth regarding. But you are playing this like a cheap game of Battleship, focused on blowing up a thing not without worth. Not without worth today, and certainly certainly not without worth as an interesting historical artifact of people actively working to expand humankind's self understanding. Why all the TNT?
- throwawaylinux 4y ago
  It's a crap metric, end of story. You're the one dreaming up these baseless "agendas", I have no idea what you're on about there.
  - rektide 4y ago
    It's not crap. It's informative & interesting & useful to think of the energy flows embodied in our material world.
    - throwawaylinux 4y ago
      I mean for currency. Utter stupidity. Understanding energy usage and all other costs (human and environmental) is great, I have no problem with that obviously.

rektide 4y ago

Ask how many farmers do not a single thing for their pasture fed cows. The pasture takes maintenance, the cows take tending & care & health services, then they are transported to a slaughter house, butchered, & packaged. These all have costs, energy costs. Just making the fences to hold them had energy costs: not big ones, but measurable ones. > My criticism does not suggest any such thing. It rather ran roughshod over considering energy & didnt recognize any worth that I could see.... yes it frigging did suggest inputs were irrelevant. Callously & with prejudice. I really dont get you agenda of disregard here. It's weirdly in denial, snubbing rudely. I dont think this energy is the ultimate way of viewing things, but it has value, it'a worth regarding. But you are playing this like a cheap game of Battleship, focused on blowing up a thing not without worth. Not without worth today, and certainly certainly not without worth as an interesting historical artifact of people actively working to expand humankind's self understanding. Why all the TNT?

throwawaylinux 4y ago
It's a crap metric, end of story. You're the one dreaming up these baseless "agendas", I have no idea what you're on about there.
- rektide 4y ago
  It's not crap. It's informative & interesting & useful to think of the energy flows embodied in our material world.
  - throwawaylinux 4y ago
    I mean for currency. Utter stupidity. Understanding energy usage and all other costs (human and environmental) is great, I have no problem with that obviously.