login
Beef production contributes to global warming (Page 3)
-
No new posts
|
 2015-10-08 9:52 AM in reply to: dmiller5 |
Pro  9391     Omaha, NE |  Subject: RE: Beef production contributes to global warmingOriginally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Originally posted by dmiller5 Hmm...that certainly makes sense on the face of it. I'll try to find the article and see what their evidence is. Re vegan: Yeah, I know, but it's not gonna happen. I don't eat a ton of meat, and I eat less than I used to, but I don't think I could quit cold turkey. (mmmm....cold turkey....) Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Not to derail an entertaining debate on global climate change, but I read something the other day that said that, environmentally speaking, if you have to eat meat, beef is the best choice. According to the article, when you account for all of the environmental impacts of mass-production livestock farming (air & water, pollution, greenhouse gases, fuel comsumption, etc.), the impact of cattle farming on the enviroment is less than that of commercial poultry or pork farming. I think you got it backwards. Ruminants produce methane, a cow produces tens of thousands of lbs of manure each year, the water consumption/lb of beef is upwards of 1,000 gallons, the crop space required to feed a cow is far larger, and the housing required is far larger. that said, stop eating meat, the most gentle way to eat for the environment is vegan, bonus if you have a big garden and eat local produce. ETA: I can find sources and exact numbers for these later if you want them (a little too busy at work atm), or you can trust the environmental engineer :D punnnn As long as we all know what our food choices do, and the consequences, everyone has to make their own decision. I just take issue when people try to pretend that their actions don't have impacts. Just out of curiosity are you a Vegan for sustainability reasons or health reasons? I only ask because I always find it curious. My daughter is a vegetarian, but she does it due to being an animal lover. She can't stand the fact of eating somethings mommy. lol
Its a combination. I started becoming interested in it for health reasons. Once I was vegan it became a lot easier to see the compassionate side because I didn't have to rationalize my behavior anymore. If you eat meat every day, it is very difficult to decide that eating meat is a bad thing to do, because then you are in effect deciding that you're being a bad person. Once I stopped eating animals I found it much easier to sit down and say, I can be a healthy person without animal products. The reason I eat animal products is because they taste good. I can now make the decision that I care more about animals/the planet than I do about eating a steak. Also need to caveat that vegans wouldn't consider me vegan. Its the easiest way to explain it, but I don't do the checking every product in my house for traces of animals, like glue, or table sugar, etc. etc. And I will eat animal products on occasion. I'm about 99.9% vegan by diet if I had to guess. That's cool. I've learned a lot about vegetarians and vegans through my daughter. It's fascinating how many different variants of vegetarianism/veganism there are. I'm practically a meatatarian myself and I'll openly admit it has nothing to do with health reasons I love the taste of meat and have to have something with meat in it at almost every meal. As you can guess I don't consider environmental impact at all, so there's zero guilt. If steak was $100/lb. I would probably eat more veggie, but that's about the only thing that would force change my behaviours (aka supply/demand)
|
| 2015-10-08 10:01 AM in reply to: dmiller5 |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Beef production contributes to global warming Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by Hook'em Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by Hook'em Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by Hook'em And rice, everyone needs to stop eating rice. rice is by far a better alternative than any animal food source But for the vegans a more gentler way to eat for the environment is without rice, right? I don't think we should be growing rice in California, a state with a severe drought, but otherwise no. So greenhouse gasses produced in rice paddy farming do not harm the environment? What greenhouse gasses? To live on this planet we will have an impact. Farming plants has impacts. Those impacts are lesser than farming animals. Saying that plants also have impacts does not negate that they are FAR LESSER impacts. Do you throw your garbage on the ground? Landfills have environmental impacts, but they are lesser than the impact of everyone throwing their garbage in the river. Waste water treatment plants have impacts, but they are far lesser than everyone throwing their chamber pots on the street. We, individually and as a species, make decisions about how we are going to act, and those decisions impact the world. Eating plants has less impact than animals. Period. We can go into which plants to eat, and how to grow them, etc. That could result in a better way of eating vegan, but to dismiss plants because the way we do things isn't "perfect" is a poor argument. I don't know which plants are more or less efficient than others, but on the surface I agree that vegan is far more sustainable overall. I would also say that GMO crops produce a lot more food which makes us more sustainable as well but many question the safety. There are a lot of things we can do to produce more food and produce it more efficiently (no matter what the food is) but it all comes down to cost/risk analysis. I would be curious of the ability of us to sustain enough food to exclusively feed the world with a vegan diet. Obviously it takes water, land, weather, etc. We currently farm most land that's farmable in the US so I'm not sure where our increase would come from. I'm not picking on it, I'm genuinely curious. |
| 2015-10-08 10:24 AM in reply to: #5143824 |
Extreme Veteran 3025 Maryland | Subject: RE: Beef production contributes to global warming Think about it this way, we grow corn to feed to the cows. The cows eat the corn, poop some out, use some energy to move, a lot turns into heat, etc. The rest is used to grow, of that we only really use the parts that make the meat. There is a ton of waste in this process. If we just ate the corn originally we would need less land. There's a calories/acre statistic that I can dig up showing that if we were all vegan, we could feed the world 4 times with the land we are using. (Don't quote me on that number but I remember it being significant) |
| 2015-10-08 10:52 AM in reply to: 0 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Beef production contributes to global warming Sure as hell, the day we all go vegan because the studies show it's a better way, someone will commmision a study, with more of our tax dollars, exposing the problems with a vegan population and how it is detrimental to something the first study never considered....it seems to be one of life's constants. I respect the fact that you don't admonish anymore for not leading the same lifestyle that you do......it's refreshing coming from a "vegan". My daughter has recently decided to be a vegetarian, and I'm sure she will jump off the vegan cliff just to aggravate the hell out of me. I can't wait. I remember a day when my dad and the other neighborhood men would change the oil in their vehicles at home. Then they'd dump the oil down the storm sewers. I remember dumping unused medications in the toilet. I remember never recycling anything and now almost 3/4 of our trash is in our recycle bin. I think a cleaner planet is just a more enjoyable place to live. I'm good with it. I have no intention of changing my food source. Maybe future generations will, for any number of reasons......sustainablilty, health, environmental, etc. That's ok, and maybe it'll even become necessary. I hope I never see it......because I enjoy eating meat. I even enjoy hunting for some of the meat I eat. I feel no guilt or shame over it.
Edited by Left Brain 2015-10-08 10:54 AM |
| 2015-10-08 12:24 PM in reply to: dmiller5 |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Beef production contributes to global warming Originally posted by dmiller5 Think about it this way, we grow corn to feed to the cows. The cows eat the corn, poop some out, use some energy to move, a lot turns into heat, etc. The rest is used to grow, of that we only really use the parts that make the meat. There is a ton of waste in this process. If we just ate the corn originally we would need less land. There's a calories/acre statistic that I can dig up showing that if we were all vegan, we could feed the world 4 times with the land we are using. (Don't quote me on that number but I remember it being significant) Makes sense, like I said before I don't know much about this but I do find it interesting. I don't know the numbers but I read something a few months back about the percentage of food American households waste being astronomical. As the world population continues to increase over the coming centuries it will obviously be important to understand long term sustainability and become increasingly more efficient with our food. I think we can both agree that today it's not a huge deal in developed countries, but it very well may become a huge deal in the future so I'm all for studying and understanding it more. I know I have my opinions about global warming and how much man effects it etc. but I'm a huge environmental/sustainability guy. You'd think it would be a bit of an oxymoron, but it really isn't. I want to reduce our dependence on oil, i want to reduce waste, I want to improve the environment, but I want to do it smartly. Me paying $10,000 a year for a carbon tax to offset some factory in China does nothing other than make some politician's crony's rich. That's where I get ticked. |
| 2015-10-08 12:35 PM in reply to: tuwood |
Extreme Veteran 3025 Maryland | Subject: RE: Beef production contributes to global warming Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by dmiller5 Think about it this way, we grow corn to feed to the cows. The cows eat the corn, poop some out, use some energy to move, a lot turns into heat, etc. The rest is used to grow, of that we only really use the parts that make the meat. There is a ton of waste in this process. If we just ate the corn originally we would need less land. There's a calories/acre statistic that I can dig up showing that if we were all vegan, we could feed the world 4 times with the land we are using. (Don't quote me on that number but I remember it being significant) Makes sense, like I said before I don't know much about this but I do find it interesting. I don't know the numbers but I read something a few months back about the percentage of food American households waste being astronomical. As the world population continues to increase over the coming centuries it will obviously be important to understand long term sustainability and become increasingly more efficient with our food. I think we can both agree that today it's not a huge deal in developed countries, but it very well may become a huge deal in the future so I'm all for studying and understanding it more. I know I have my opinions about global warming and how much man effects it etc. but I'm a huge environmental/sustainability guy. You'd think it would be a bit of an oxymoron, but it really isn't. I want to reduce our dependence on oil, i want to reduce waste, I want to improve the environment, but I want to do it smartly. Me paying $10,000 a year for a carbon tax to offset some factory in China does nothing other than make some politician's crony's rich. That's where I get ticked. I'm with you on the food waste. Easiest way to reduce our footprint would be to stop growing twice as much as we need and throwing half out. My personal favorite way to reduce food waste is to buy local, that way the stuff isn't rotting on its trip from California to Maryland. |
| 2015-10-08 4:39 PM in reply to: 0 |
Extreme Veteran 3025 Maryland | Subject: RE: Beef production contributes to global warming worth checking out, well done debate representing both sides of the argument equally. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCcJq56ZMJg and a TIME magazine, can we agree on this source? article citing some of the statistics I alluded to earlier Edited by dmiller5 2015-10-08 4:40 PM |
| 2015-10-08 4:54 PM in reply to: dmiller5 |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Beef production contributes to global warming Originally posted by dmiller5 worth checking out, well done debate representing both sides of the argument equally. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCcJq56ZMJg and a TIME magazine, can we agree on this source? article citing some of the statistics I alluded to earlier haha, fortunately I don't know a lot about the food production stuff so you won't get much argument out of me on this one. I do find this topic interesting from a sustainability standpoint, but I'm meh on the warming the planet side. Not sure if i can get through he mega long youtube video but I'll give it a shot later. |
| 2015-10-08 7:09 PM in reply to: tuwood |
Extreme Veteran 3025 Maryland | Subject: RE: Beef production contributes to global warming yeah its a lonnngggggg one. But one of the only ones that I've seen that really tries to present both sides and let you decide, rather than pushing one agenda or another. |
| 2015-10-08 7:50 PM in reply to: dmiller5 |
| New user 900 , | Subject: RE: Beef production contributes to global warming Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Not to derail an entertaining debate on global climate change, but I read something the other day that said that, environmentally speaking, if you have to eat meat, beef is the best choice. According to the article, when you account for all of the environmental impacts of mass-production livestock farming (air & water, pollution, greenhouse gases, fuel comsumption, etc.), the impact of cattle farming on the enviroment is less than that of commercial poultry or pork farming. I think you got it backwards. Ruminants produce methane, a cow produces tens of thousands of lbs of manure each year, the water consumption/lb of beef is upwards of 1,000 gallons, the crop space required to feed a cow is far larger, and the housing required is far larger. that said, stop eating meat, the most gentle way to eat for the environment is vegan, bonus if you have a big garden and eat local produce. ETA: I can find sources and exact numbers for these later if you want them (a little too busy at work atm), or you can trust the environmental engineer :D Can you explain what you are referring to when you wrote of "housing required" for cows? |
| 2015-10-08 8:35 PM in reply to: NXS |
Extreme Veteran 3025 Maryland | Subject: RE: Beef production contributes to global warming Originally posted by NXS Originally posted by dmiller5 Can you explain what you are referring to when you wrote of "housing required" for cows? Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Not to derail an entertaining debate on global climate change, but I read something the other day that said that, environmentally speaking, if you have to eat meat, beef is the best choice. According to the article, when you account for all of the environmental impacts of mass-production livestock farming (air & water, pollution, greenhouse gases, fuel comsumption, etc.), the impact of cattle farming on the enviroment is less than that of commercial poultry or pork farming. I think you got it backwards. Ruminants produce methane, a cow produces tens of thousands of lbs of manure each year, the water consumption/lb of beef is upwards of 1,000 gallons, the crop space required to feed a cow is far larger, and the housing required is far larger. that said, stop eating meat, the most gentle way to eat for the environment is vegan, bonus if you have a big garden and eat local produce. ETA: I can find sources and exact numbers for these later if you want them (a little too busy at work atm), or you can trust the environmental engineer :D umm, well the cows need some amount of space, they're either on huge pastures (rarely) or some kind of industrial feedlot |
| 2015-10-08 8:38 PM in reply to: dmiller5 |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Beef production contributes to global warming Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by NXS Originally posted by dmiller5 Can you explain what you are referring to when you wrote of "housing required" for cows? Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Not to derail an entertaining debate on global climate change, but I read something the other day that said that, environmentally speaking, if you have to eat meat, beef is the best choice. According to the article, when you account for all of the environmental impacts of mass-production livestock farming (air & water, pollution, greenhouse gases, fuel comsumption, etc.), the impact of cattle farming on the enviroment is less than that of commercial poultry or pork farming. I think you got it backwards. Ruminants produce methane, a cow produces tens of thousands of lbs of manure each year, the water consumption/lb of beef is upwards of 1,000 gallons, the crop space required to feed a cow is far larger, and the housing required is far larger. that said, stop eating meat, the most gentle way to eat for the environment is vegan, bonus if you have a big garden and eat local produce. ETA: I can find sources and exact numbers for these later if you want them (a little too busy at work atm), or you can trust the environmental engineer :D umm, well the cows need some amount of space, they're either on huge pastures (rarely) or some kind of industrial feedlot Or...
|
| 2015-10-08 8:59 PM in reply to: dmiller5 |
| New user 900 , | Subject: RE: Beef production contributes to global warming Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by NXS Originally posted by dmiller5 Can you explain what you are referring to when you wrote of "housing required" for cows? Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Not to derail an entertaining debate on global climate change, but I read something the other day that said that, environmentally speaking, if you have to eat meat, beef is the best choice. According to the article, when you account for all of the environmental impacts of mass-production livestock farming (air & water, pollution, greenhouse gases, fuel comsumption, etc.), the impact of cattle farming on the enviroment is less than that of commercial poultry or pork farming. I think you got it backwards. Ruminants produce methane, a cow produces tens of thousands of lbs of manure each year, the water consumption/lb of beef is upwards of 1,000 gallons, the crop space required to feed a cow is far larger, and the housing required is far larger. that said, stop eating meat, the most gentle way to eat for the environment is vegan, bonus if you have a big garden and eat local produce. ETA: I can find sources and exact numbers for these later if you want them (a little too busy at work atm), or you can trust the environmental engineer :D umm, well the cows need some amount of space, they're either on huge pastures (rarely) or some kind of industrial feedlot They only spend the last 3-6 months before slaughter on a feed lot, the rest is on pasture or range. |
| 2015-10-08 9:20 PM in reply to: NXS |
Extreme Veteran 3025 Maryland | Subject: RE: Beef production contributes to global warming Originally posted by NXS Originally posted by dmiller5 They only spend the last 3-6 months before slaughter on a feed lot, the rest is on pasture or range. Originally posted by NXS Originally posted by dmiller5 Can you explain what you are referring to when you wrote of "housing required" for cows? Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Not to derail an entertaining debate on global climate change, but I read something the other day that said that, environmentally speaking, if you have to eat meat, beef is the best choice. According to the article, when you account for all of the environmental impacts of mass-production livestock farming (air & water, pollution, greenhouse gases, fuel comsumption, etc.), the impact of cattle farming on the enviroment is less than that of commercial poultry or pork farming. I think you got it backwards. Ruminants produce methane, a cow produces tens of thousands of lbs of manure each year, the water consumption/lb of beef is upwards of 1,000 gallons, the crop space required to feed a cow is far larger, and the housing required is far larger. that said, stop eating meat, the most gentle way to eat for the environment is vegan, bonus if you have a big garden and eat local produce. ETA: I can find sources and exact numbers for these later if you want them (a little too busy at work atm), or you can trust the environmental engineer :D umm, well the cows need some amount of space, they're either on huge pastures (rarely) or some kind of industrial feedlot ok.....but the feed lot is in use all year round, and that takes up space..... |
| 2015-10-08 9:26 PM in reply to: dmiller5 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Beef production contributes to global warming Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by NXS Originally posted by dmiller5 They only spend the last 3-6 months before slaughter on a feed lot, the rest is on pasture or range. Originally posted by NXS Originally posted by dmiller5 Can you explain what you are referring to when you wrote of "housing required" for cows? Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Not to derail an entertaining debate on global climate change, but I read something the other day that said that, environmentally speaking, if you have to eat meat, beef is the best choice. According to the article, when you account for all of the environmental impacts of mass-production livestock farming (air & water, pollution, greenhouse gases, fuel comsumption, etc.), the impact of cattle farming on the enviroment is less than that of commercial poultry or pork farming. I think you got it backwards. Ruminants produce methane, a cow produces tens of thousands of lbs of manure each year, the water consumption/lb of beef is upwards of 1,000 gallons, the crop space required to feed a cow is far larger, and the housing required is far larger. that said, stop eating meat, the most gentle way to eat for the environment is vegan, bonus if you have a big garden and eat local produce. ETA: I can find sources and exact numbers for these later if you want them (a little too busy at work atm), or you can trust the environmental engineer :D umm, well the cows need some amount of space, they're either on huge pastures (rarely) or some kind of industrial feedlot ok.....but the feed lot is in use all year round, and that takes up space..... Are there people trying to move in there or something? It looks like a good place for cows to be to me. What's the problem? |
| 2015-10-08 9:28 PM in reply to: Left Brain |
Extreme Veteran 3025 Maryland | Subject: RE: Beef production contributes to global warming thats not a good place for cows to be. And he asked what i meant by housing for cows, that is space taken up by the cows. I don't see how this is a controversial answer.
touchy much y'all? |
| 2015-10-08 9:42 PM in reply to: dmiller5 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Beef production contributes to global warming Originally posted by dmiller5 thats not a good place for cows to be. And he asked what i meant by housing for cows, that is space taken up by the cows. I don't see how this is a controversial answer.
touchy much y'all? They're fine......it's food. Now, we can debate what the best way to treat food is and maybe get some common ground. We buy a half side of beef every 8 months or so.....we know the people who give every oz. of food and every bit of care to the cow that ends up in our freezer. No hormones, no antibiotics....family raised. But in the end.....the cow we eat is just as dead as the cows in that feed lot are about to be.....and the meat gets fat-marbled and tender while they stand around doing nothing....that's good for flavor. I don't feel sorry for cows.....they are here for me to eat. The only reason I like good treatment for them is that it is healthier food. |
| 2015-10-08 9:47 PM in reply to: dmiller5 |
| New user 900 , | Subject: RE: Beef production contributes to global warming Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by NXS Originally posted by dmiller5 They only spend the last 3-6 months before slaughter on a feed lot, the rest is on pasture or range. Originally posted by NXS Originally posted by dmiller5 Can you explain what you are referring to when you wrote of "housing required" for cows? Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Not to derail an entertaining debate on global climate change, but I read something the other day that said that, environmentally speaking, if you have to eat meat, beef is the best choice. According to the article, when you account for all of the environmental impacts of mass-production livestock farming (air & water, pollution, greenhouse gases, fuel comsumption, etc.), the impact of cattle farming on the enviroment is less than that of commercial poultry or pork farming. I think you got it backwards. Ruminants produce methane, a cow produces tens of thousands of lbs of manure each year, the water consumption/lb of beef is upwards of 1,000 gallons, the crop space required to feed a cow is far larger, and the housing required is far larger. that said, stop eating meat, the most gentle way to eat for the environment is vegan, bonus if you have a big garden and eat local produce. ETA: I can find sources and exact numbers for these later if you want them (a little too busy at work atm), or you can trust the environmental engineer :D umm, well the cows need some amount of space, they're either on huge pastures (rarely) or some kind of industrial feedlot ok.....but the feed lot is in use all year round, and that takes up space..... Not when the price of beef is down. The amount of space taken up by feed lots is minuscule.. |
| 2015-10-08 10:03 PM in reply to: Left Brain |
Extreme Veteran 3025 Maryland | Subject: RE: Beef production contributes to global warming Originally posted by Left Brain Originally posted by dmiller5 thats not a good place for cows to be. And he asked what i meant by housing for cows, that is space taken up by the cows. I don't see how this is a controversial answer.
touchy much y'all? They're fine......it's food. Now, we can debate what the best way to treat food is and maybe get some common ground. We buy a half side of beef every 8 months or so.....we know the people who give every oz. of food and every bit of care to the cow that ends up in our freezer. No hormones, no antibiotics....family raised. But in the end.....the cow we eat is just as dead as the cows in that feed lot are about to be.....and the meat gets fat-marbled and tender while they stand around doing nothing....that's good for flavor. I don't feel sorry for cows.....they are here for me to eat. The only reason I like good treatment for them is that it is healthier food. i mean this will just turn into a discussion of me saying you're amoral and you saying humans are superior to other animals and thats not a worthwhile road to go down.
I'll be running green party, y'all can write me in |
| 2015-10-08 10:12 PM in reply to: 0 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Beef production contributes to global warming Well, you might say I'm amoral, but I won't say humans are superior to other animals. We all have our place here.....the cow's place is on my table....on a bun...cooked medium. I guess if a cow doesn't like it's lot in life it can get a job and buy a house with a table of it's own. Edited by Left Brain 2015-10-08 10:14 PM |
| 2015-10-09 7:26 AM in reply to: Left Brain |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Beef production contributes to global warming Originally posted by Left Brain Well, you might say I'm amoral, but I won't say humans are superior to other animals. We all have our place here.....the cow's place is on my table....on a bun...cooked medium. I guess if a cow doesn't like it's lot in life it can get a job and buy a house with a table of it's own. Good thing the cows don't have a 2nd Amendment. This could get ugly quick. |
| 2015-10-09 7:45 AM in reply to: tuwood |
Champion 7821 Brooklyn, NY | Subject: RE: Beef production contributes to global warming Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by Left Brain Well, you might say I'm amoral, but I won't say humans are superior to other animals. We all have our place here.....the cow's place is on my table....on a bun...cooked medium. I guess if a cow doesn't like it's lot in life it can get a job and buy a house with a table of it's own. Good thing the cows don't have a 2nd Amendment. This could get ugly quick. "These cows, they're bringing drugs, they're rapists. And some, I assume, are good cows." |
| 2015-10-09 7:47 AM in reply to: tuwood |
Champion 7821 Brooklyn, NY | Subject: RE: Beef production contributes to global warming Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by Left Brain Well, you might say I'm amoral, but I won't say humans are superior to other animals. We all have our place here.....the cow's place is on my table....on a bun...cooked medium. I guess if a cow doesn't like it's lot in life it can get a job and buy a house with a table of it's own. Good thing the cows don't have a 2nd Amendment. This could get ugly quick. (bull 2a.jpg) Attachments ---------------- bull 2a.jpg (6KB - 1 downloads) |
| 2015-10-09 8:09 AM in reply to: jmk-brooklyn |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Beef production contributes to global warming Wait.....we're not talking about Bulls......that's a different animal than a cow. They can just come and take your house because they feel like it. |
| 2015-10-09 10:06 AM in reply to: Left Brain |
Extreme Veteran 3025 Maryland | Subject: RE: Beef production contributes to global warming As long as we don't let the bulls marry one another. This is a bull marries cow country.
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||
|
| |||
|
| |||
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK