5 ms·

> it is the most environmentally friendly option Its not. You need 30 kg of grain or other edible product to make just 1 kg of meat. We are literally turning m

> it is the most environmentally friendly option Its not. You need 30 kg of grain or other edible product to make just 1 kg of meat. We are literally turning more food to less food. An unrelated statistic showed that if the world has increased its meat consumption just a little bit more, we would run out of food. The conversion rate is that bad. ... Context: https://www.worldanimalprotection.us/blogs/hidden-driver-fac https://www.worldanimalprotection.us/blogs/hidden-driver-fac... > It is estimated that livestock consume 70% of the grain grown in the US, and that half of the water consumed in the US is used to grow grain for cattle

base698 4y ago
By protein content it's a bit better for beef. 1kg of corn has 32g protein. 1kg of beef has 260g of protein.
- comte7092 4y ago
  The point was that you need 30 kg of corn to make 1 kg of beef. Therefore 32g * 30 = 960g of corn protein to create 260g of beef protein.
  - bequanna 4y ago
    You’re missing the point. There is always some efficiency loss at every stage, but we’re turning something that is not ideal for human consumption (conventional field corn) to something that is very palatable.
    - comte7092 4y ago
      No I get the point, your point misses the opportunity cost of the land that was used to raise animal feed, it could be used to grow any number of other crops for human consumption. That is unless you are of the belief that humans have an innate need to consume beef specifically.
nightski 4y ago
Well that's not true. Most cattle is grass fed for the majority of it's life at which point they will have them eat at feed lots to fatten up. Second, feed lots can use things like by-products of sugar production (molasses, beet pulp pellets, etc...) for feed. These are not human consumable and require no extra food to be grown. I've worked with a company that does over half a billion in revenue on this alone. There is a lot more to this than your comment is indicating.
- slothtrop 4y ago
  > Well that's not true. Most cattle is grass fed for the majority of it's life at which point they will have them eat at feed lots to fatten up. In the West, or globally? Because commercial agriculture here relies on corn/grain feed most of their life.
  - comte7092 4y ago
    You may want to check your sources, because that’s not how commercial at works in the west. Cattle are indeed raised on grass for the majority of their life, however they are fed grain to make weight for slaughter. In a sense, both positions are incorrect, because the image of cows grazing on grass most of their lives with little grain at the end is a very skewed picture (without grain the lifecycle would be substantially longer), but it is also the case that all cows do start off on grass. The whole narrative that cows are “good for the environment” because they eat grass is fairly absurd though. The amount of land they require alone in the US is absolutely massive, and you can just take a look at the many fights over western water rights to see that even the impact of grass feeding is substantial.
    - unity1001 4y ago
      > because that’s not how commercial at works in the west You dont seem to be aware of factory farming... https://www.worldanimalprotection.us/blogs/hidden-driver-factory-farmings-planetary-destruction-animal-feed https://www.worldanimalprotection.us/blogs/hidden-driver-fac... > It is estimated that livestock consume 70% of the grain grown in the US, and that half of the water consumed in the US is used to grow grain for cattle.

base698 4y ago

By protein content it's a bit better for beef. 1kg of corn has 32g protein. 1kg of beef has 260g of protein.

comte7092 4y ago
The point was that you need 30 kg of corn to make 1 kg of beef. Therefore 32g * 30 = 960g of corn protein to create 260g of beef protein.
- bequanna 4y ago
  You’re missing the point. There is always some efficiency loss at every stage, but we’re turning something that is not ideal for human consumption (conventional field corn) to something that is very palatable.
  - comte7092 4y ago
    No I get the point, your point misses the opportunity cost of the land that was used to raise animal feed, it could be used to grow any number of other crops for human consumption. That is unless you are of the belief that humans have an innate need to consume beef specifically.

nightski 4y ago

Well that's not true. Most cattle is grass fed for the majority of it's life at which point they will have them eat at feed lots to fatten up. Second, feed lots can use things like by-products of sugar production (molasses, beet pulp pellets, etc...) for feed. These are not human consumable and require no extra food to be grown. I've worked with a company that does over half a billion in revenue on this alone. There is a lot more to this than your comment is indicating.

slothtrop 4y ago
> Well that's not true. Most cattle is grass fed for the majority of it's life at which point they will have them eat at feed lots to fatten up. In the West, or globally? Because commercial agriculture here relies on corn/grain feed most of their life.
- comte7092 4y ago
  You may want to check your sources, because that’s not how commercial at works in the west. Cattle are indeed raised on grass for the majority of their life, however they are fed grain to make weight for slaughter. In a sense, both positions are incorrect, because the image of cows grazing on grass most of their lives with little grain at the end is a very skewed picture (without grain the lifecycle would be substantially longer), but it is also the case that all cows do start off on grass. The whole narrative that cows are “good for the environment” because they eat grass is fairly absurd though. The amount of land they require alone in the US is absolutely massive, and you can just take a look at the many fights over western water rights to see that even the impact of grass feeding is substantial.
  - unity1001 4y ago
    > because that’s not how commercial at works in the west You dont seem to be aware of factory farming... https://www.worldanimalprotection.us/blogs/hidden-driver-factory-farmings-planetary-destruction-animal-feed https://www.worldanimalprotection.us/blogs/hidden-driver-fac... > It is estimated that livestock consume 70% of the grain grown in the US, and that half of the water consumed in the US is used to grow grain for cattle.