animals are mostly fed plants or parts of plants that people can’t or won’t eat. the field that grows soybeans for oil has those same soybeans made into soy meal or soy cake and it would be industrial waste if it wasn’t fed to animals.
Yep, because it would be too expensive to have whole crops grown for them only for us to consume then thereafter. That said, they still require a lot of water until they’re slaughtered.
Like it or not, farming meat is more high energy and wasteful than farming plants. For example, plants are suitable for vertical farming, using less land.
even the water estimates are overstated, and for the same reason: animals eat grass and that counts against their water use. animals are fed cottonseed, which is a byproduct of the textile industry, and the water is counted against them. the methodology for measuring these thingsis fucked: animals help us conserve resources.
I… really disagree with the last statement. They don’t help conserve, they consume resources. This includes swathes of land that should be reserved for native flora and fauna to feed back into the eco system. What you’re describing isn’t a circular economy but rather a system put in place to minimise cost and maximise output. The evidence of this is in the article of this post where much of the land is farmland for meat production.
Alternatively, growing different types of plants in cycles can help rejuvenate the soil and put nutrients back in. Meat production ignores this.
What you’re describing isn’t a circular economy but rather a system put in place to minimise cost and maximise output.
what i’m describing is an intricately interdependent economy. i agree that a circular one sounds better, being able to sustain a lifestyle without any foreign inputs. that doesn’t change whether, at the moment, it’s better that wefeed cottonseed to cows than throw it away.
these aren’t mutually exclusive. if the cottonseed would otherwise be wasted, then feeding it to cows IS conserving resources, even if cows, on the whole, consume more than they help conserve.
cottonseed is also pressed for oil, but it’s not very commonly used. it could be crushed for compost, I suppose. regardless, it’s a byproduct of the textile industry, so any use at all is reclaiming resources that were overspent in cotton production.
A lot less than farming meat which requires all the cost of growing that and ensuring the animals are fed and watered until slaughtering.
animals are mostly fed plants or parts of plants that people can’t or won’t eat. the field that grows soybeans for oil has those same soybeans made into soy meal or soy cake and it would be industrial waste if it wasn’t fed to animals.
Yep, because it would be too expensive to have whole crops grown for them only for us to consume then thereafter. That said, they still require a lot of water until they’re slaughtered.
Like it or not, farming meat is more high energy and wasteful than farming plants. For example, plants are suitable for vertical farming, using less land.
even the water estimates are overstated, and for the same reason: animals eat grass and that counts against their water use. animals are fed cottonseed, which is a byproduct of the textile industry, and the water is counted against them. the methodology for measuring these thingsis fucked: animals help us conserve resources.
I… really disagree with the last statement. They don’t help conserve, they consume resources. This includes swathes of land that should be reserved for native flora and fauna to feed back into the eco system. What you’re describing isn’t a circular economy but rather a system put in place to minimise cost and maximise output. The evidence of this is in the article of this post where much of the land is farmland for meat production.
Alternatively, growing different types of plants in cycles can help rejuvenate the soil and put nutrients back in. Meat production ignores this.
what i’m describing is an intricately interdependent economy. i agree that a circular one sounds better, being able to sustain a lifestyle without any foreign inputs. that doesn’t change whether, at the moment, it’s better that wefeed cottonseed to cows than throw it away.
these aren’t mutually exclusive. if the cottonseed would otherwise be wasted, then feeding it to cows IS conserving resources, even if cows, on the whole, consume more than they help conserve.
What would cottonseed be used for if not fed to cows? How would it be wasted? Genuinely curious since I’m not American.
Also, this line of debate completely details the original topic which is that almost half of the land in the US is used for meat production.
cottonseed is also pressed for oil, but it’s not very commonly used. it could be crushed for compost, I suppose. regardless, it’s a byproduct of the textile industry, so any use at all is reclaiming resources that were overspent in cotton production.