> Grass fed beef consumed locally/regionally reduces fertilizer use and transportation costs > Deforestation is only a problem if you have a corrupt governmen

> Grass fed beef consumed locally/regionally reduces fertilizer use and transportation costs > Deforestation is only a problem if you have a corrupt government that doesn't manage its land While governance plays a role in deforestation, these pastures are often already deforested areas. Producing beef there still demands a significant amount of agricultural land for a minor share of our caloric intake. Reforesting could offer greater benefits like carbon storage and biodiversity restoration. > People will naturally eat less meat at a higher price point. Currently the externalities of industrial meat production aren't priced into the cost of factory meat, which is why it's artificially cheap Exactly, and that's why I believe that subsidies for polluting and destructive sectors should be abolished, and these sectors should be appropriately taxed. Doing so could make the price of meat prohibitive for most, which aligns with your point about higher prices reducing consumption. It's uncertain how many animals could be raised sustainably, and how many people would be able to afford meat from such sources. The number for both is likely low. I also worry about biodiversity. If we've managed to reduce animal populations by 70% in the last 50 years, how long will it be until they collapse completely? Agriculture is the main culprit, with animal agriculture making up 80% of it. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/oct/13/almost-70-of-animal-populations-wiped-out-since-1970-report-reveals-aoe https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/oct/13/almost-7...