4 ms·

I love when vegan studies always say that cows use X amount of water but their calculations never factor in that it rains. --- I'd prefer when seeing these ar

I love when vegan studies always say that cows use X amount of water but their calculations never factor in that it rains. --- I'd prefer when seeing these articles that the author talks about which land mass or eco system they are talking about. Australia has hundreds of thousands of acres of land where the animals roam in self sustainable set ups. Ripping up these ecosystems to grow nuts and beans would be "worse" for the environment.

Grimblewald 3y ago
also that methane from cow farts gets counted but if me pounding beans to produce protein at a fraction of a cows efficiency while farting up a storm is somehow carbon neutral?
- etrautmann 3y ago
  I would bet (and hope for your sake) that your farts are much less voluminous than most cows.
- etrautmann 3y ago
  Running the numbers on this, it seems as though one cow produces as much methane as 7000 of you (500L per day vs .07 L methane if random internet sources are to be trusted)
  - Grimblewald 3y ago
    Napkin math and unvetted reference warning but here goes: there is about 1B cows, there is about 8B humans. Fart composition matters as well, if we're counting methane as worse, more plant ingestion means higher fraction of methane. humans produce around 0.5g methane per day average beef cow of 500kg produces around 0.265g methane per day, average beef cow weighs ~1000kg, so lets say we're around on par for methane. So, if we get rid of cows and instead ingest plant matter directly, we would need to see a increase of methane production of no more than 11.11% to break even. however, if top google hits continue to be (if they ever were) reliable, we will see an increase of about 7 farts per day, from a 13-21 average for a male. This is an increase of about 33-54% so if in all the error that will exist arising from my franken-data and all the assumptions made along the way don't significant impact general accuracy, then we're not even close to breaking even.
    - myshpa 3y ago
      [flagged]
- netsharc 3y ago
  HN user tries to be an expert in animal biology...
  - ipaddr 3y ago
    HR user tries to put down another only to realize that person was head of Obama's fart counting taskforce in 2009
chiefalchemist 3y ago
Perhaps. But keep in mind, the water that runs off a farm is reusable, so to speak. On the other hand, run off from cows or pigs is all but toxic until it's treated. Australia is an outliner. Factory farming in The West is an entirely different - and much uglier - story.
- Ekaros 3y ago
  No one is removing cow dungs from pastures... At that level it is not that big of an deal... And they even spread the pig manure all over fields here. The smell tells everything.
  - chiefalchemist 3y ago
    Pastures? Do you nonot know what *factory farming* is and does? What you're talking about - at least in the USA / The West - is a fraction of total production. There's a reason they want to make "meat" in a lab. Hint: It's not because of traditional pastures.
myshpa 3y ago
> Ripping up these ecosystems to grow nuts and beans would be "worse" for the environment. No, you could reforest/rewild those lands and stop droughts and and biodiversity loss and repair microclima and soil health etc. etc. And by growing nuts it would be worse for the environment? Growing nut trees is co2 positive. How could forests with nut trees be worse than pastures with dried out grass? If the world adopted a plant-based diet we would reduce global agricultural land use from 4 to 1 billion hectares (and free up an area as big as Africa for rewilding / reforesting) https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets
- 23B1 3y ago
  "If the world adopted an [x] diet" is blue-sky thinking my friend. Human behavior – on such an intimate and culturally-important thing – is practically immutable – and probably should be. The higher-order requirements of 'Four Pest' policies are incompatible with human rights. There's ways to attain equilibrium with the planet without using thumb screws.
  - myshpa 3y ago
    Equilibrium? We're in the overshoot, and have crossed safe boundaries long ago. Our global food system is the primary driver of biodiversity loss https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/press-release/our-global-food-system-primary-driver-biodiversity-loss https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/press-release/our-glob... Agriculture production as a major driver of the Earth system exceeding planetary boundaries https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320356605_Agriculture_production_as_a_major_driver_of_the_Earth_system_exceeding_planetary_boundaries https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320356605_Agricultu... Safe and just Earth system boundaries https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06083-8 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06083-8
- midoridensha 3y ago
  >And by growing nuts it would be worse for the environment? Growing nut trees is co2 positive. How could forests with nut trees be worse than pastures with dried out grass? Because the nut trees would need massive amounts of irrigation. If you have a place with pastures of dried-out grass, what makes you think there's enough rainfall there to sustain a forest of nut trees?
jahewson 3y ago
That’s pretty great, being able to use natural pasture is a wonderful thing and Australia is very lucky in that regard. In the US (the country that consumes more beef than any other) only 1% of beef is produced in this manner. Much of the water usage is feed and much of the the feed is grown on irrigated land.

Grimblewald 3y ago

also that methane from cow farts gets counted but if me pounding beans to produce protein at a fraction of a cows efficiency while farting up a storm is somehow carbon neutral?

etrautmann 3y ago
I would bet (and hope for your sake) that your farts are much less voluminous than most cows.
etrautmann 3y ago
Running the numbers on this, it seems as though one cow produces as much methane as 7000 of you (500L per day vs .07 L methane if random internet sources are to be trusted)
- Grimblewald 3y ago
  Napkin math and unvetted reference warning but here goes: there is about 1B cows, there is about 8B humans. Fart composition matters as well, if we're counting methane as worse, more plant ingestion means higher fraction of methane. humans produce around 0.5g methane per day average beef cow of 500kg produces around 0.265g methane per day, average beef cow weighs ~1000kg, so lets say we're around on par for methane. So, if we get rid of cows and instead ingest plant matter directly, we would need to see a increase of methane production of no more than 11.11% to break even. however, if top google hits continue to be (if they ever were) reliable, we will see an increase of about 7 farts per day, from a 13-21 average for a male. This is an increase of about 33-54% so if in all the error that will exist arising from my franken-data and all the assumptions made along the way don't significant impact general accuracy, then we're not even close to breaking even.
  - myshpa 3y ago
    [flagged]
netsharc 3y ago
HN user tries to be an expert in animal biology...
- ipaddr 3y ago
  HR user tries to put down another only to realize that person was head of Obama's fart counting taskforce in 2009

chiefalchemist 3y ago

Perhaps. But keep in mind, the water that runs off a farm is reusable, so to speak. On the other hand, run off from cows or pigs is all but toxic until it's treated. Australia is an outliner. Factory farming in The West is an entirely different - and much uglier - story.

Ekaros 3y ago
No one is removing cow dungs from pastures... At that level it is not that big of an deal... And they even spread the pig manure all over fields here. The smell tells everything.
- chiefalchemist 3y ago
  Pastures? Do you nonot know what *factory farming* is and does? What you're talking about - at least in the USA / The West - is a fraction of total production. There's a reason they want to make "meat" in a lab. Hint: It's not because of traditional pastures.

myshpa 3y ago

> Ripping up these ecosystems to grow nuts and beans would be "worse" for the environment. No, you could reforest/rewild those lands and stop droughts and and biodiversity loss and repair microclima and soil health etc. etc. And by growing nuts it would be worse for the environment? Growing nut trees is co2 positive. How could forests with nut trees be worse than pastures with dried out grass? If the world adopted a plant-based diet we would reduce global agricultural land use from 4 to 1 billion hectares (and free up an area as big as Africa for rewilding / reforesting) https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets

23B1 3y ago
"If the world adopted an [x] diet" is blue-sky thinking my friend. Human behavior – on such an intimate and culturally-important thing – is practically immutable – and probably should be. The higher-order requirements of 'Four Pest' policies are incompatible with human rights. There's ways to attain equilibrium with the planet without using thumb screws.
- myshpa 3y ago
  Equilibrium? We're in the overshoot, and have crossed safe boundaries long ago. Our global food system is the primary driver of biodiversity loss https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/press-release/our-global-food-system-primary-driver-biodiversity-loss https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/press-release/our-glob... Agriculture production as a major driver of the Earth system exceeding planetary boundaries https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320356605_Agriculture_production_as_a_major_driver_of_the_Earth_system_exceeding_planetary_boundaries https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320356605_Agricultu... Safe and just Earth system boundaries https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06083-8 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06083-8
midoridensha 3y ago
>And by growing nuts it would be worse for the environment? Growing nut trees is co2 positive. How could forests with nut trees be worse than pastures with dried out grass? Because the nut trees would need massive amounts of irrigation. If you have a place with pastures of dried-out grass, what makes you think there's enough rainfall there to sustain a forest of nut trees?

jahewson 3y ago

That’s pretty great, being able to use natural pasture is a wonderful thing and Australia is very lucky in that regard. In the US (the country that consumes more beef than any other) only 1% of beef is produced in this manner. Much of the water usage is feed and much of the the feed is grown on irrigated land.