3 ms·
Perhaps if 80% of edible crops weren’t feed to livestock and subsidies were removed from animal agriculture then those will be no-issues. I find appealing that
by neuralRiot 4y ago
Perhaps if 80% of edible crops weren’t feed to livestock and subsidies were removed from animal agriculture then those will be no-issues. I find appealing that anyone on HN being a progressive and open-minded public with an objective opinion would be promoting an environmentally destructive industry like the animal AG.
- somewhereoutth 4y agoMost animal feed is in fact not edible - that is my point, animals are very good at converting stuff you can grow anywhere (like grass), stuff that wouldn't give you much nutrition beyond carbs (wheat?), and stuff you wouldn't like to eat anyway (like left overs from the brewing industry). Replacing animals in our food chain without mass starvation/malnutrition would appear to be impossible.
- neuralRiot 4y agoAnimals are not “magic machines” the protein on their bodies comes from the food they eat. The only magic machines are plants that turn water, minerals and light into food. http://ussoy.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/consumption-1.jpg http://ussoy.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/consumption-1.jp...
- jononomo 4y agoWhat's your point? Humans can't eat grass, but cows can eat grass and then human's can eat cows. Think of a pasture as a "lab" and a cow as "lab-grown meat" if it makes you feel better.
- neuralRiot 4y agoHonestly, do you think that 2 billion cows can be fed grass only? There’s no viable way to keep meat consumption at the current levels feeding them grass.
- jononomo 4y agoYes -- I think we should use nuclear power to desalinate sea water and turn the Sahara dessert into a vast pasture to raise two billion cows on. I also think we should do this in Australia.