10 ms·

Hilarious to read people writing that they'd be better off with steak as a protein source, it might be better for you - but not the planet. We'd be better of

Hilarious to read people writing that they'd be better off with steak as a protein source, it might be better for you - but not the planet. We'd be better of as a species by eating the grains directly and bypassing the animals. Silly food subsidies (at least in the UK), subsidise meat and dairy over grain and veg. For example it's cheaper to buy sausages than it is to buy aubergines. Pretty senseless!

a8da6b0c91d 13y ago
Grain farming is less sustainable than pastured animal raising. You're welcome to a discussion about supportable human populations, but the idea that grain and legume farming is more ecologically sustainable is flat out wrong.
- Nelkins 13y ago
  That's interesting, I've actually never heard this before. Do you have a source?
  - VLM 13y ago
    Cost of industrial non-organic grain production, herbicides, insecticides and the whole lot vs hey cow, here's some natural prairie, now go eat it, which doesn't cost as much environmentally.
    - inthewind 13y ago
      This cows on natural prairies idea is pretty much bullshit. Unless you are talking about some maasai tribes that bleed out their cattle for protein shakes. Cattle farming is huge agricultural business. And for most people their meat is farmed (with additional inputs). Europeans decimated the Americas for their corn fed fatty marbled cattle. The rainforests are being cleared for soy, as with most arable crops a high percentage are grown as animal feeds. So there isn't any escape. Eating a cow has collateral damage too. Take a fraction of those arable crops, don't bother meat farming and move over to better farming methods that are more in tune with nature. It's a balancing act. If you haven't any ethical qualms about meat eating then you can still farm those fringe places pastorally - reindeer, goats, kangaroos etc.
      - a8da6b0c91d 13y ago
        I have a freezer full of pastured beef & game venison and that's pretty much all I eat in terms of protein. I have piles of grass fed butter in my fridge. What's bullshit about that?
        inthewind 13y ago
        I think though you're an exception. What a luxury. It sounds like you've weighed up the environmental pros and cons for your locale, which is more than most do. I still think there's better use for that land than raising cattle on it. I can't help but think that good meat is reserved for the luxury of a few, that includes well raised organic meats. It's only the wealthy people that I know that can afford such.
        a8da6b0c91d 13y ago
        The cost argument is bunk. I spend much less than most people on food. The average westerner blows thousands of dollars on expensive processed food and garbage restaurant meals. There is nothing but consumer preference preventing most people in western countries from eating like I do.
        VLM 13y ago
        "I still think there's better use for that land than raising cattle on it." Are you claiming cowboys are herding cattle in the streets of Manhattan? Or "everyone" wants to move to a cattle ranch in the middle of nowhere in Texas but they just don't know it yet? You could work your argument either direction but I don't think either will work very well. Farmers and ranchers like money just like anyone else. If they could subdivide their land to city slickers at SFO/SV square footage prices I think they would...
- inthewind 13y ago
  Good point. But we should be thinking about supporting the masses. If I have a hillside that isn't being used for anything else, than fair enough, I could throw a couple of sheep/goats on it and later reap the rewards. I'm not sure how many of these romantic pastures continue to exist though. I live in a green fertile valley, where sheep farming is rife. The sheep get additional feed on top of their grazing. I'd prefer acres of trees or some other arable crop instead. Sadly most of us won't ever get access to the land to do so. Less than 1% of the population owns 70% of the land, running Britain a close second to Brazil for the title of the country with the most unequal land distribution on Earth. - http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/dec/17/high-house-prices-inequality-normans http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/dec/17/high-ho...
- IgorPartola 13y ago
  I can see that, though then you run into all manner of ethical questions of eating animals as well. What we eat is a pretty complex social, environmental, and moral problem. Also, is it possible that grain farming is worse for the planet in some circumstances and better in others? I am sure that a small rice paddy is much better for the environment than a barn full of chickens in cages too small for them to stand up.
  - a8da6b0c91d 13y ago
    > ethical questions of eating animals as well Grain and legume farming kills massive numbers of amphibians, birds, and rodents, with huge knock on ecological consequences. When you slaughter a pastured cow or sheep it's one life. During their lives the hooved animals serve a vital role in grassland ecology. The 1930s American dustbowl desertification happened in substantial part because of the preceding elimination of bison and steer. > a barn full of chickens in cages If chickens are caged in barns they're eating mostly grain. Historically normal chickens ran around outside and ate mostly bugs, in season.
    - VLM 13y ago
      Don't forget fish kills from fertilizer runoff. Depending on what part of the country you live in. Locally runoff fish kills means vegetarians are in the running with fish eaters in terms of total dead fish per year.
VLM 13y ago
Couldn't disagree more strongly for economic reasons. Lets say I pay $4 for a pound of bratwurst. He cannot do more than $4 of environmental damage and still stay in business. Even if brats magically fell from the sky for free, he simply can't do worse than stack up $4 worth of lead and old car tires and set them on fire or whatever other environmental degradation you can imagine. The good organic farmers market meat costs more than $4/lb but less than $10 so the argument still holds. In fact I'm about to take delivery of a quarter-cow from a local organic farmer, got my high efficiency freezer all defrosted and emptied and ready to fill with delicious organic local grass fed beef. On the other hand, the guy who I just handed a $10 to for a pound of quinoa can stack of $10 worth of old car tires and set them on fire and dump $10 of antifreeze into the river or WTF. He can afford to "ruin the environment" to the tune of $9.99 and still stay in business, unlike the brat guy above who would go almost instantly out of business if he spent $9 trashing the environment for every $4 incoming. This is before I even get started on the supply side, where for the sake of argument lets say I have to kill one baby seals per $1 take home pay. That means to earn the $10 for quinoa regardless of how "pure" his quinoa growing operation is, ten baby seals died, whereas to earn the $4 for brats, regardless of how "pure" his pig sty is, a mere four baby seals had to die. I would argue that most people in the real world work at pretty ugly companies, ecologically speaking, so most of the enviro damage comes from earning the money rather than how its spent. Another example is I burn about a gallon of gas per day that I drive to work, so even if I do the ultimate green thing and finance planting a rainforest or something, I've still ecologically destroyed a gallon of gas before I even crack open my wallet. There are some interesting petroleum arguments also, in that a pound of "meat" from the organic farmer five miles away at the farmers market burned a heck of a lot less diesel / bunker fuel than a pound of quinoa from another hemisphere. Although a small timer grew and sold a little native quinoa at the market which I bought, reality is that the vast majority of it is imported from another hemisphere at substantial cost. I can buy locally grown organic beef, pork, and chicken. Most people can't buy locally grown quinoa. Some people can, and American's are literally starving them out of the local quinoa market, which is too bad. Don't get me wrong, I am a hard core environmentalist at heart for example I think people who dump industrial waste into rivers I hike by should be capital punished by being forced to drink what they dumped till they croak, its only fair since the poor bastards living downstream are already literally drinking it... But feel good irrational non-analyzed environmentalism does more bad for the earth than good, and it turns out the reality is that everyone's better off if I eat a quarter pound steak rather than a quarter pound of quinoa, under existing conditions.

a8da6b0c91d 13y ago

Grain farming is less sustainable than pastured animal raising. You're welcome to a discussion about supportable human populations, but the idea that grain and legume farming is more ecologically sustainable is flat out wrong.

Nelkins 13y ago
That's interesting, I've actually never heard this before. Do you have a source?
- VLM 13y ago
  Cost of industrial non-organic grain production, herbicides, insecticides and the whole lot vs hey cow, here's some natural prairie, now go eat it, which doesn't cost as much environmentally.
  - inthewind 13y ago
    This cows on natural prairies idea is pretty much bullshit. Unless you are talking about some maasai tribes that bleed out their cattle for protein shakes. Cattle farming is huge agricultural business. And for most people their meat is farmed (with additional inputs). Europeans decimated the Americas for their corn fed fatty marbled cattle. The rainforests are being cleared for soy, as with most arable crops a high percentage are grown as animal feeds. So there isn't any escape. Eating a cow has collateral damage too. Take a fraction of those arable crops, don't bother meat farming and move over to better farming methods that are more in tune with nature. It's a balancing act. If you haven't any ethical qualms about meat eating then you can still farm those fringe places pastorally - reindeer, goats, kangaroos etc.
    - a8da6b0c91d 13y ago
      I have a freezer full of pastured beef & game venison and that's pretty much all I eat in terms of protein. I have piles of grass fed butter in my fridge. What's bullshit about that?
      - inthewind 13y ago
        I think though you're an exception. What a luxury. It sounds like you've weighed up the environmental pros and cons for your locale, which is more than most do. I still think there's better use for that land than raising cattle on it. I can't help but think that good meat is reserved for the luxury of a few, that includes well raised organic meats. It's only the wealthy people that I know that can afford such.
        a8da6b0c91d 13y ago
        The cost argument is bunk. I spend much less than most people on food. The average westerner blows thousands of dollars on expensive processed food and garbage restaurant meals. There is nothing but consumer preference preventing most people in western countries from eating like I do.
        VLM 13y ago
        "I still think there's better use for that land than raising cattle on it." Are you claiming cowboys are herding cattle in the streets of Manhattan? Or "everyone" wants to move to a cattle ranch in the middle of nowhere in Texas but they just don't know it yet? You could work your argument either direction but I don't think either will work very well. Farmers and ranchers like money just like anyone else. If they could subdivide their land to city slickers at SFO/SV square footage prices I think they would...
inthewind 13y ago
Good point. But we should be thinking about supporting the masses. If I have a hillside that isn't being used for anything else, than fair enough, I could throw a couple of sheep/goats on it and later reap the rewards. I'm not sure how many of these romantic pastures continue to exist though. I live in a green fertile valley, where sheep farming is rife. The sheep get additional feed on top of their grazing. I'd prefer acres of trees or some other arable crop instead. Sadly most of us won't ever get access to the land to do so. Less than 1% of the population owns 70% of the land, running Britain a close second to Brazil for the title of the country with the most unequal land distribution on Earth. - http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/dec/17/high-house-prices-inequality-normans http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/dec/17/high-ho...
IgorPartola 13y ago
I can see that, though then you run into all manner of ethical questions of eating animals as well. What we eat is a pretty complex social, environmental, and moral problem. Also, is it possible that grain farming is worse for the planet in some circumstances and better in others? I am sure that a small rice paddy is much better for the environment than a barn full of chickens in cages too small for them to stand up.
- a8da6b0c91d 13y ago
  > ethical questions of eating animals as well Grain and legume farming kills massive numbers of amphibians, birds, and rodents, with huge knock on ecological consequences. When you slaughter a pastured cow or sheep it's one life. During their lives the hooved animals serve a vital role in grassland ecology. The 1930s American dustbowl desertification happened in substantial part because of the preceding elimination of bison and steer. > a barn full of chickens in cages If chickens are caged in barns they're eating mostly grain. Historically normal chickens ran around outside and ate mostly bugs, in season.
  - VLM 13y ago
    Don't forget fish kills from fertilizer runoff. Depending on what part of the country you live in. Locally runoff fish kills means vegetarians are in the running with fish eaters in terms of total dead fish per year.

VLM 13y ago

Couldn't disagree more strongly for economic reasons. Lets say I pay $4 for a pound of bratwurst. He cannot do more than $4 of environmental damage and still stay in business. Even if brats magically fell from the sky for free, he simply can't do worse than stack up $4 worth of lead and old car tires and set them on fire or whatever other environmental degradation you can imagine. The good organic farmers market meat costs more than $4/lb but less than $10 so the argument still holds. In fact I'm about to take delivery of a quarter-cow from a local organic farmer, got my high efficiency freezer all defrosted and emptied and ready to fill with delicious organic local grass fed beef. On the other hand, the guy who I just handed a $10 to for a pound of quinoa can stack of $10 worth of old car tires and set them on fire and dump $10 of antifreeze into the river or WTF. He can afford to "ruin the environment" to the tune of $9.99 and still stay in business, unlike the brat guy above who would go almost instantly out of business if he spent $9 trashing the environment for every $4 incoming. This is before I even get started on the supply side, where for the sake of argument lets say I have to kill one baby seals per $1 take home pay. That means to earn the $10 for quinoa regardless of how "pure" his quinoa growing operation is, ten baby seals died, whereas to earn the $4 for brats, regardless of how "pure" his pig sty is, a mere four baby seals had to die. I would argue that most people in the real world work at pretty ugly companies, ecologically speaking, so most of the enviro damage comes from earning the money rather than how its spent. Another example is I burn about a gallon of gas per day that I drive to work, so even if I do the ultimate green thing and finance planting a rainforest or something, I've still ecologically destroyed a gallon of gas before I even crack open my wallet. There are some interesting petroleum arguments also, in that a pound of "meat" from the organic farmer five miles away at the farmers market burned a heck of a lot less diesel / bunker fuel than a pound of quinoa from another hemisphere. Although a small timer grew and sold a little native quinoa at the market which I bought, reality is that the vast majority of it is imported from another hemisphere at substantial cost. I can buy locally grown organic beef, pork, and chicken. Most people can't buy locally grown quinoa. Some people can, and American's are literally starving them out of the local quinoa market, which is too bad. Don't get me wrong, I am a hard core environmentalist at heart for example I think people who dump industrial waste into rivers I hike by should be capital punished by being forced to drink what they dumped till they croak, its only fair since the poor bastards living downstream are already literally drinking it... But feel good irrational non-analyzed environmentalism does more bad for the earth than good, and it turns out the reality is that everyone's better off if I eat a quarter pound steak rather than a quarter pound of quinoa, under existing conditions.