Remember me
▼ Content

Increased meat consumption = Increased climate change + environmental degredation


Increased meat consumption = Increased climate change + environmental degredation27-06-2016 20:07
GingerShortcake
☆☆☆☆☆
(6)
With some countries developing rapidly their diet is shifting form plant-based to meat-based. Could this have significant impacts for the environment and climate worldwide? Then again you can't stop developing nations from developing...

https://realandhappening.wordpress.com/2016/06/21/meat-me-halfway/
27-06-2016 21:01
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10196)
GingerShortcake wrote:
With some countries developing rapidly their diet is shifting form plant-based to meat-based. Could this have significant impacts for the environment and climate worldwide? Then again you can't stop developing nations from developing...

https://realandhappening.wordpress.com/2016/06/21/meat-me-halfway/


Since man has been ranching and hunting for quite a few years, I don't see any significant change.


The Parrot Killer
27-06-2016 21:26
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5208)
GingerShortcake wrote:
With some countries developing rapidly their diet is shifting form plant-based to meat-based. Could this have significant impacts for the environment and climate worldwide? Then again you can't stop developing nations from developing...

https://realandhappening.wordpress.com/2016/06/21/meat-me-halfway/

What is "climate"?


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
28-06-2016 16:24
GingerShortcake
☆☆☆☆☆
(6)
I get your point but farming has changed quite a lot since we first started hunting, and the population has got just a little bigger but the Earth has not...
28-06-2016 22:10
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10196)
GingerShortcake wrote:
I get your point but farming has changed quite a lot since we first started hunting, and the population has got just a little bigger but the Earth has not...


Then you don't get my point.

We are more efficient at ranching in the United States (and in other countries also), but most of the world is ranching the way they've always done.

The population is not a problem. You should get out in the country more. You'll see how empty it is.


The Parrot Killer
14-09-2016 01:10
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
Ah, the dire wolves aren't a problem. Look! You can't even see any in this field! Of course, the moment you step there they'll notice you and eat you, but...

Overpopulation is a problem, not because we have nowhere to put people, but nowhere to put the farms. Meatfarms are very inefficient, because they need to be fed by many plantfarms.
14-09-2016 02:24
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10196)
jwoodward48 wrote:
Ah, the dire wolves aren't a problem. Look! You can't even see any in this field! Of course, the moment you step there they'll notice you and eat you, but...

Overpopulation is a problem, not because we have nowhere to put people, but nowhere to put the farms. Meatfarms are very inefficient, because they need to be fed by many plantfarms.


Obviously another city dweller that's never been out in the country.

You want to deal with 'overpopulation'? You first.

Cattle ranches do not need plant farms to feed their cattle. They use their own plants, except for buying an occasional hay bale to supplement. Cattle eat grass, sagebrush, pretty much any plant (even tansy unfortunately). All you really need is water for them.

Chicken ranches often grow their own seed for their chickens. Those that don't buy their chicken feed from a local grower. In return you get eggs, and eventually the chicken itself.

Pigs eat anything that's food at all (except orange peels, apparently). They especially love ice cream.

Fish eat meal that is purchased. Other fish each the shit from the first fish helping to keep the tank clean. Both fish are sold for human consumption. One is rather popular...tilapia. That's the 2nd fish.

Most animal feed is made from byproducts of making something else. During ethanol production, for example, the syrup is extracted from the corn. That syrup is fermented into ethanol. The remaining cornmeal is a byproduct that is used to feed cattle and other animals. The flak and fiber is used to burn in the boiler that powers the plant.

Our farms in the United States do very well. They produce more than any other nation. We truly do feed the world.


The Parrot Killer
14-09-2016 03:01
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
Do we have enough food for the world? People are starving. We either need better distribution or more supply.

Also, I was referring to factory farms, which tend to rely on plantfarms for their food. I really don't know the proportion of animals in factory farms to the animals in ranches.

What I do know is that excluding the fact that animals can eat plants we can't, and can survive on land we can't grow food on, animals are approximately ten times worse in terms of energy. It takes ten times as much energy, and thus ten times as much land, to make a pig rather than a pig's worth of corn (as compared with a human, getting the same nutrition from both). The excluded part is not enough to counter-weigh the ten-times-worse part.
14-09-2016 20:54
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10196)
jwoodward48 wrote:
Do we have enough food for the world? People are starving. We either need better distribution or more supply.

Also, I was referring to factory farms, which tend to rely on plantfarms for their food. I really don't know the proportion of animals in factory farms to the animals in ranches.

What I do know is that excluding the fact that animals can eat plants we can't, and can survive on land we can't grow food on, animals are approximately ten times worse in terms of energy. It takes ten times as much energy, and thus ten times as much land, to make a pig rather than a pig's worth of corn (as compared with a human, getting the same nutrition from both). The excluded part is not enough to counter-weigh the ten-times-worse part.


What you feed a pig a human wouldn't eat. That pigs worth of corn is corn byproducts. We use the good stuff for ourselves and our ethanol (we are burning our own food for fuel).

We have enough food. The problem is one of distribution. That one is not easy to solve with all the wars in the world and the cost of shipping.

The bigger problem is water.


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 14-09-2016 20:54




Join the debate Increased meat consumption = Increased climate change + environmental degredation:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Nancy, an oil tycoon's daughter is kidnapped by a cultish environmental group who's ready to wage226-11-2019 21:22
Fake Meat?020-09-2019 20:30
Crown Capital Management Environmental Reviews 16 Things That Colleges are Doing to Help the Environment509-08-2019 23:48
Objectivity of Environmental Science109-08-2019 02:13
Wisconsin DNR secretary: Climate change an environmental justice issue124-04-2019 23:34
Articles
Appendix C - China's Environmental Crisis
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact