28 ms·

> Meat contributes literally zero to global CO2 emissions. After all, it's recycled grass. Do you genuinely not understand that these animals are bred for huma

by tpush 4y ago

> Meat contributes literally zero to global CO2 emissions. After all, it's recycled grass. Do you genuinely not understand that these animals are bred for humans consumption? They wouldn't exist otherwise. If you can nurture a human with X amount of plant food, but instead use X+Y amount of plant food (and extra water, fertilizer, fossils fuels etc.) to raise cattle to nurture the same amount of humans, you've absolutely increased carbon emissions as compared to the first option. I sincerely do not get how one can miss this point??

amanaplanacanal 4y ago
Of course the long term answer is to stop having so many damn babies!
- josephcsible 4y ago
  People in the developed world are having too few babies.
tomp 4y ago
Water is a cycle and isn't actually consumed. Fertilizer requires energy, as does transport. If we make plant agriculture "sustainable" (i.e. independent of fossil fuels) then we will also make meat agriculture sustainable.
- pawsforthought 4y ago
  Independence from fossil fuel use is far from the only factor determining sustainability of our agriculture, though, sadly. Land use is a huge concern, given we already use half of the world’s habitable land for our agriculture [1], putting immense pressure on ecosystems and biodiversity due to this habitat loss. Organic agriculture is less intensive, meaning for the same total food production, it must be more extensive — it requires more land [2]. That’s not to say there aren’t very good reasons to shift to organic agriculture. Fertilizer runoff leads to vast ocean dead zones, such as that in the Gulf of Mexico [3]. Further, we have an estimated 60 years of farming left if soil depletion continues at its current pace [4]. If we are to both curtail our land use and switch to regenerative farming methods, we must curtail meat production. It takes around 100 times as much land to produce 1 calorie of beef or lamb versus plant-based alternatives (similar for the same quantity of protein) [5], such that we could reduce our land use for farming from 4 billion to 1 billion hectares and still feed the whole world on plant-based diets. I’m not sure if I’ve connected the dots here especially well, but I hope I’ve at least conveyed that sustainability is multi-dimensional, and goes far beyond just getting off fossil fuels — even though that is a vital step. [1]: https://ourworldindata.org/land-use https://ourworldindata.org/land-use [2]: https://ourworldindata.org/is-organic-agriculture-better-for-the-environment https://ourworldindata.org/is-organic-agriculture-better-for... [3]: https://oceantoday.noaa.gov/deadzonegulf-2021/welcome.html https://oceantoday.noaa.gov/deadzonegulf-2021/welcome.html [4]: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/only-60-years-of-farming-left-if-soil-degradation-continues/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/only-60-years-of-... [5]: https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets
josephcsible 4y ago
> If you can nurture a human with X amount of plant food, but instead use X+Y amount of plant food (and extra water, fertilizer, fossils fuels etc.) to raise cattle to nurture the same amount of humans The key points you're missing are that the plants that cows eat aren't suitable for human consumption, and the land that said plants grow on isn't suitable for growing any plants that are suitable for human consumption.
- tpush 4y ago
  The vast majority of cow's feed is grain & soy, both of which humans can eat directly. Current levels of meat consumption both in value and cost wouldn't even be remotely sustainable if everyone only ate pasture raised, grass fed cows. Not to mention that existing biotopes are being destroyed in order to create more pasture; it's very much a self-made problem.
  - josephcsible 4y ago
    Isn't grass still a big part of what cows eat? As for grain and soy, I thought the parts of them we fed to cows were what was left over after we harvested the parts that we can eat.
  - dennis_jeeves1 4y ago
    Assuming that 25 kg of grain/soy is needed to make 1kg of meat (just picked a number from a poster here), are you really sure that 25 kg of grain/soy is better nutritionally than 1 kg meat ?
simonsarris 4y ago
> Do you genuinely not understand that these animals are bred for humans consumption? They wouldn't exist otherwise. In the United States we actually destroyed an equivalent biomass of Bison and replaced them with cattle. Though perhaps you celebrate the Bison eradication, too.

by tpush 4y ago

amanaplanacanal 4y ago

Of course the long term answer is to stop having so many damn babies!

josephcsible 4y ago
People in the developed world are having too few babies.

tomp 4y ago

Water is a cycle and isn't actually consumed. Fertilizer requires energy, as does transport. If we make plant agriculture "sustainable" (i.e. independent of fossil fuels) then we will also make meat agriculture sustainable.

pawsforthought 4y ago
Independence from fossil fuel use is far from the only factor determining sustainability of our agriculture, though, sadly. Land use is a huge concern, given we already use half of the world’s habitable land for our agriculture [1], putting immense pressure on ecosystems and biodiversity due to this habitat loss. Organic agriculture is less intensive, meaning for the same total food production, it must be more extensive — it requires more land [2]. That’s not to say there aren’t very good reasons to shift to organic agriculture. Fertilizer runoff leads to vast ocean dead zones, such as that in the Gulf of Mexico [3]. Further, we have an estimated 60 years of farming left if soil depletion continues at its current pace [4]. If we are to both curtail our land use and switch to regenerative farming methods, we must curtail meat production. It takes around 100 times as much land to produce 1 calorie of beef or lamb versus plant-based alternatives (similar for the same quantity of protein) [5], such that we could reduce our land use for farming from 4 billion to 1 billion hectares and still feed the whole world on plant-based diets. I’m not sure if I’ve connected the dots here especially well, but I hope I’ve at least conveyed that sustainability is multi-dimensional, and goes far beyond just getting off fossil fuels — even though that is a vital step. [1]: https://ourworldindata.org/land-use https://ourworldindata.org/land-use [2]: https://ourworldindata.org/is-organic-agriculture-better-for-the-environment https://ourworldindata.org/is-organic-agriculture-better-for... [3]: https://oceantoday.noaa.gov/deadzonegulf-2021/welcome.html https://oceantoday.noaa.gov/deadzonegulf-2021/welcome.html [4]: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/only-60-years-of-farming-left-if-soil-degradation-continues/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/only-60-years-of-... [5]: https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets

josephcsible 4y ago

> If you can nurture a human with X amount of plant food, but instead use X+Y amount of plant food (and extra water, fertilizer, fossils fuels etc.) to raise cattle to nurture the same amount of humans The key points you're missing are that the plants that cows eat aren't suitable for human consumption, and the land that said plants grow on isn't suitable for growing any plants that are suitable for human consumption.

tpush 4y ago
The vast majority of cow's feed is grain & soy, both of which humans can eat directly. Current levels of meat consumption both in value and cost wouldn't even be remotely sustainable if everyone only ate pasture raised, grass fed cows. Not to mention that existing biotopes are being destroyed in order to create more pasture; it's very much a self-made problem.
- josephcsible 4y ago
  Isn't grass still a big part of what cows eat? As for grain and soy, I thought the parts of them we fed to cows were what was left over after we harvested the parts that we can eat.
- dennis_jeeves1 4y ago
  Assuming that 25 kg of grain/soy is needed to make 1kg of meat (just picked a number from a poster here), are you really sure that 25 kg of grain/soy is better nutritionally than 1 kg meat ?

simonsarris 4y ago

> Do you genuinely not understand that these animals are bred for humans consumption? They wouldn't exist otherwise. In the United States we actually destroyed an equivalent biomass of Bison and replaced them with cattle. Though perhaps you celebrate the Bison eradication, too.