• RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 month ago

    Which part are you dubious about?

    Not enough land for meat? There is technically… but it requires factory farms and STILL we need to chop down huge swaths of the amazon to keep the machine churning.

    Not enough land for plant based diets? Is takes only about 1/10th the amount of land to grow plants for human consumption than to grow plants for feeding our animals that we then consume. Sure not every alfalfa farm on the planet can switch to cucumbers out the gate, but well over 10% can…

    • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      commie is a troll. They’re very fun to argue with, but just know that you aren’t changing anyone’s mind when you do

      • RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 month ago

        Why? Every step you move up the food chain requires roughly 10x as much inputs as outputs. To get a pound of protein from a cow you have to feed it 10lbs of plant protein. Almost all cattle feed comes from farms, just like your veggies. Anywhere we grow soybeans and hay for cattle could easily be converted to growing fruits and vegetables for human consumption. There’s a small loss of efficiency by growing human-quality food instead of cattle food in these spaces, but its nothing in comparison to the loss of resources from trying to raise cattle.

        Almost none of the meat we eat is truly free-range - it all gets fed farmed produce that comes from farms that could grow food for humans in a fraction of the space.

            • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 month ago

              a large portion of the land used to raise livestock are grasslands. what portion of feed they are given is also, largely, crop seconds or industrial byproduct. the source for your owid link is largely poore-nemecek, a paper I would trust to tell me the co2e of co2

              • seeking_perhaps@mander.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 month ago

                I’d like to see a source for “what portion of feed they are given is also, largely, crop seconds or industrial byproduct”. The vast majority of information I have seen on this topic is that we produce more crops specifically to feed animals than we do to feed humans. Which, just from an energy perspective, is completely logical to me.

                  • seeking_perhaps@mander.xyz
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 month ago

                    I don’t see how this supports your argument that eliminating livestock would not reduce land usage. 76% of soybean production is going to animal feed, do you really think that percentage would not reduce if you switched it over to providing food for humans?

        • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          soy beans are an excellent example: they’re not grown for livestock. they are grown for people, and what is fed to livestock is industrial byproduct that would otherwise be waste.