6 ms·
Removing tariffs on beef specifically is a serious mistake, there's no need to incentivise any more production of that. Other agricultural imports, like soy an
by 3ple_alpha 8mo ago
Removing tariffs on beef specifically is a serious mistake, there's no need to incentivise any more production of that.
Other agricultural imports, like soy and coffee beans, are a huge boon to the EU on the other hand. If this results in cheaper coffee, everyone in my country, for one, will be ecstatic.
- trollbridge 8mo agoWhat’s wrong with pasture raised beef like they raise in Argentina?
- coryrc 8mo agoMethane emissions, I assume. (Solvable with 2% seaweed in the diet) Also possibly rainforest destruction for crops, but I'm not as sure about that.
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- trollbridge 8mo agoRainforest in Argentina? Argentina beef are raised in pasture. About as eco friendly as it gets. Converting pasture to row crops is far more devastating to the environment (topsoil loss, GHG emissions from loss of biomatter in topsoil, fossil fuel derived fertiliser and more.)
- expedition32 8mo agoAbsolutely nothing it is just European farmers crying. As if the EU doesn't already spend billions on farming subsidies. Even if WW3 breaks out we can turn all of Europe into a vegetable garden in less than a year- the UK did this in 1940. Nobody is going to starve FFS.
- trollbridge 8mo agoThat’s a pretty bold claim. I think people who want to eat need to be comfortable producing their own food. Being utterly reliant on, say, the U.S. means ultimately the U.S. will tell you what to do.
- eigenspace 8mo agoWhile I agree that we ideally shouldn't be incentivizing more beef production, the reality is that making a trade agreement (at least the European way) involves a lot of give-and-take, compromises, and concessions. Mercosur countries have a powerful beef industry which they're proud of, and their governments are interested in advancing that industry. Lowered beef tariffs were almost certainly one of their prerequisites to forming a deal. That said, do note that the tariffs are only lowered up to a quota level of beef imports. Relative to the size of the EU's domestic beef industry, these imports are not that significant.
- mytailorisrich 8mo agoWe have to notice the blatant hypocrisy here: on the one hand we are told that the environment and net zero are top priorities, and on the other hand we are also told that it is great to have beef shipped to us from literally the other side of the world... (Tokyo is nearer to Brussels than Buenos Aires)
- eigenspace 8mo agoThe process of shipping of beef from Buenos Aires to Brussels has a much smaller climate impact than the process of producing that beef in the first place. In particular, the methane burped up from cows has a gigantic impact on radiative forcing in the upper atmosphere. And again, the amount of beef being allowed to be shipped to Europe is quota'd to a quite amount relative to the domestic industry. That's not to say that we shouldn't do anything about these emissions, but the solution is going to be to develop more climate friendly shipping techniques, not to eliminate global trade.
- redox99 8mo agoBeef from Argentina is basically as good as it gets in terms of animal welfare. Most are raised under extensive systems (not confined feedlots). They live on large grasslands (hundreds of acres) where they roam freely and graze pastures. That's completely unlike things like Chicken which live their whole life in over crowded poultry houses, never seeing the outdoors, or even daylight.
- wiether 8mo agoAnimal welfare is not the issue here. Pollution, land and wildlife destruction is the issue. Beef is probably the worst use of land to produce food given how much input it requires and negative outputs it produces.
- dlisboa 8mo agoSoybeans have probably a worse impact on the environment than beef. Most of the deforestation in SA in the past couple of decades was for soybean farms.
- eigenspace 8mo agoWell, that's a very misleading statement. Most of those soybeans aren't being produced to be eaten by humans. Most soybeans are used for animal feed. It's the meat industry that is primarily driving deforestation, both directly for pasture, and indirectly for animal feed.
- dlisboa 8mo agoNot in South America. Cattle here eats grass. Soybean is exported mainly to China which uses it for other reasons, not feeding cattle.
- wiether 8mo agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soybean#Uses https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soybean#Uses
- dlisboa 8mo agoYes, as you can see, it’s not for cattle.
- jules-jules 8mo agoAccording to this source, 77% of soy production is used for animal feed. That only a small percentage of it goes to cattle is irrelevant in terms of the damage caused.
- dlisboa 8mo agoWhich is my point from the beginning. Soybean production is worse than beef production for the environment when it comes to South America.