4 ms·
You don't need feed crops for meat. Historically people used marginal land where crops don't grow to graze animals. (And there is a lot of marginal land, even w
by otabdeveloper4 2y ago
You don't need feed crops for meat. Historically people used marginal land where crops don't grow to graze animals. (And there is a lot of marginal land, even with modern fertilizers.)
Anything else makes no economic sense.
- deepvibrations 2y agoReality is that more than 99 percent of US meat production facilities are factory farms.
- lupusreal 2y agoIf you're talking about chickens or pigs, sure. Cows though are raised in fields and only spend a short time being plumped up on feed lots.
- zukzuk 2y agoA lot of “economic sense” depends on where you draw the boundaries of your externalities. If you exclude environmental impact, basic human rights, animal welfare, and social stability, a lot of really short-sighted and destructive setups suddenly start to make “economic sense”.
- moooo99 2y agoYou technically don’t need them if people would consume reasonable amount of animal products, which they don’t. In the actual real world we all live in the vast majority of meat comes from factory farms whose entire existence relies on feed crops and antibiotics abuse. And feed crops are often from questionable origins.
- thunfischtoast 2y agoIt apparently does make short-term economic sense because we use 6 million km^2 of cropland to feed our animals instead of us directly. https://ourworldindata.org/global-land-for-agriculture https://ourworldindata.org/global-land-for-agriculture It does not make sense long-term, but the long-term bill will be paid by someone else, so people today don't care.