31 ms·
> Other arable land is used for animal feed production, and together with grazing land represents the other 77% of agriculture land Right, and since we're only
by randomdata 4y ago
> Other arable land is used for animal feed production, and together with grazing land represents the other 77% of agriculture land
Right, and since we're only talking about cropland, that 77% has no relevance to the discussion. That it keeps coming up is rather bizarre. Indeed, if you keep pounding a square peg into a round hold hard enough it may eventually go in, but one sure does look silly for doing it in the first place.
- myshpa 4y agoThat 77% CONTAINS crop land. https://www.renewmethod.com/post/what-is-arable-land https://www.renewmethod.com/post/what-is-arable-land "Arable land is classified as land that can be plowed for the purpose of growing crops." Please, look at the graph one more time.
- randomdata 4y agoArable land includes meadows, pastures, etc. Animals can (and do) eat from those lands, but cropland is more specific. Your weird tangent has no relevance.
- myshpa 4y ago> Probably not without radically changing how we grow plants for human consumption ... Wrong. > ~60% of the soybeans are intended for direct human consumption and ~40% for animal consumption. I imagine that is not atypical Wrong. > around 35% of the output ... for animal consumption, which is effectively what the real world data also shows ... Wrong. > Nowhere near 50% of the world's land area is suitable for cropland. Wrong. > Your own link suggests that only 23% of agricultural lands are suitable for cropland. Wrong. > Arable land includes meadows, pastures, etc. Animals can (and do) eat from those lands, but cropland is more specific Wrong (in the context of) https://ourworldindata.org/uploads/2020/01/Global-land-use-graphic.png https://ourworldindata.org/uploads/2020/01/Global-land-use-g... > Your weird tangent ... It's called logic. I give up.
- myshpa 4y agoYou're the only one in this discussion talking about crop land. To focuse solely on crop land and ignore pastures is misleading. > Eloff: ... won't need to raise animals or food for animals ... we could rewild huge parts of the Earth > randomdata: probably not ... 36% of the cropland is used for animal food ... Even if we kept all the arable land for human consumption (to compensate for missing meat, assuming the lab-grown meat will take some time to scale) we'd have 3.3 billion hectares of pastures to rewild/reforest. Or we could reforest those 35% of arable land we use for growing animal feed and instead use a fraction of pastures for nuts/fruit production. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/global-pasture https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/global-pasture Forests cover 40 mil. km2, and animal agriculture takes 37 mil. km2. Majority of plant-based foods is produced on 11 mil. km2. By switching to plant-based we could increase forest cover from 40 mil. km2 to 70+ mil. km2. "We might even address the very real disaster scenarios presently threatening the world with questions like these: "What if you could make a simple and compassionate change in your life that would increase available farmland, increase available clean water, reduce rainforest destruction, reduce greenhouse gas production, reduce the threat from antibiotic-resistant bacteria, decrease land and waterway pollution, prevent creation of ocean dead zones, end your participation in the deaths of sentient individuals and increase overall human health by switching to a plant-based diet? Would you do it?” This is the reality we actually live in, and this is the choice each one of us faces." https://yourveganfallacyis.com/en/vegans-would-eat-meat-on-a-desert-island https://yourveganfallacyis.com/en/vegans-would-eat-meat-on-a... OFF-TOPIC: we should reforest some deserts/barren areas as well