Distasteful vegan TV ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Nasher said:
Needs a lot more land for the crops.
Click to expand...

Vegan food does not need a lot more land for crops compared to animal agriculture?

The amount of food and water needed for one cow, compared to how much meat that cow produces is insane. If those crops were used for direct to human consumption we end up with a much higher yield, and a more sustainable model.
 
Last edited:
Crizzy said:
But surely veganism is not an additional burden to food production, it's a relief on the current system?

If fields weren't being used to produce vegan crops they'd still be used in other ways which wouldn't be any less damaging. It's not like they would be left wild, if they can somehow turn a profit for the owner then they'll be utilised.
Click to expand...
a lot of animals are grazed on land that can't be used for other crops, so you'd just be removing a percentage of available calories and then needing additional land for growing crops
 
Crizzy said:
Vegan food does not need a lot more land for crops compared to animal agriculture?

The amount of food and water needed for one cow, compared to how much meat that cow produces is insane. If those crops were used for direct to human consumption we end up with a much higher yield, and a more sustainable model.
Click to expand...
humans don't eat grass
 
andybird123 said:
humans don't eat grass
Click to expand...
Let's also not forget that the grass is (most of the time) on land which is not suitable for crop farming, hence we use it for livestock.

This seems an often ignored (or at the very least dismissed) issue with the whole "if we used the land for crops instead" argument.

Most of the time, the land on which we farm livestock is not viable for crops.
 
Last edited:
andybird123 said:
a lot of animals are grazed on land that can't be used for other crops, so you'd just be removing a percentage of available calories and then needing additional land for growing crops
Click to expand...

It's not the land that the animals use for grazing that could be used for crops for humans, it's the land that is used to grow their feed.
 
Crizzy said:
Vegan food does not need a lot more land for crops compared to animal agriculture?

The amount of food and water needed for one cow, compared to how much meat that cow produces is insane. If those crops were used for direct to human consumption we end up with a much higher yield, and a more sustainable model.
Click to expand...

To have any chance of reaching the production figures required to feed the population, would require intensive working of the land and liberal amounts of herbicides, pesticides and fertiliser. Those chemicals are mostly driven from the petroleum industry and crops are very sensitive to climate and water requirements are very variable. In the UK water isn’t really an issue but it’s life and death in most areas of the world.
 
jigger said:
To have any chance of reaching the production figures required to feed the population, would require intensive working of the land and liberal amounts of herbicides, pesticides and fertiliser. Those chemicals are mostly driven from the petroleum industry and crops are very sensitive to climate and water requirements are very variable. In the UK water isn’t really an issue but it’s life and death in most areas of the world.
Click to expand...

But we're doing it already for livestock?
 
Crizzy said:
But how is the equivalent, eating meat, more sustainable than veganism? Sustainability of food in general is a real huge issue, but don't you agree that the latter is the better option of the two?

Health implications, like what? You can be healthy on a well planned vegan diet? We've discussed this, although there is the question that all the studies into health benefits have been subverted by pro-vegan 7th day Adventists.
Click to expand...

From the things I've read, in terms of environmental impact, livestock rearing is significantly worse than raising crops when things are at the scale they are nowadays. You have to keep in mind that as well as having to feed the animals (and they eat more than grass, they can need more or less supplemental food depending weather conditions and how the fields are doing. They also need to be fed over winter, which requires growing crops specifically to keep them fed), they're a huge source of pollution. Even when you factor in transporting crops from different countries, it comes out significantly lower in terms of emissions.
 
Devilman said:
Let's also not forget that the grass is (most of the time) on land which is not suitable for crop farming, hence we use it for livestock.

This seems an often ignored (or at the very least dismissed) issue with the whole "if we used the land for crops instead" argument.

Most of the time, the land on which we farm livestock is not viable for crops.
Click to expand...

I'm not ignoring or dismissing the point, it's valid. What I am saying is that land used for grazing isn't the focus of where crops for humans could be grown, it's the land that is used to produce their feed.
 
Parsley said:
From the things I've read, in terms of environmental impact, livestock rearing is significantly worse than raising crops when things are at the scale they are nowadays. You have to keep in mind that as well as having to feed the animals (and they eat more than grass, they can need more or less supplemental food depending weather conditions and how the fields are doing. They also need to be fed over winter, which requires growing crops specifically to keep them fed), they're a huge source of pollution. Even when you factor in transporting crops from different countries, it comes out significantly lower in terms of emissions.
Click to expand...

Well it’s the left over pant matter from the crops that’s used as feed in winter. Usually at least.
 
Last edited:
jigger said:
No, not really and nothing like the scales you’re talking about.
Click to expand...

We feed 1.5 billion cattle a year, and a cow will eat significantly more than a human.

That doesn't take into account the food production required for all other forms of livestock.
 
Crizzy said:
It's not the land that the animals use for grazing that could be used for crops for humans, it's the land that is used to grow their feed.
Click to expand...

What happens to the vast hill farms currently maintained by grazing livestock?
 
Last edited:
As said before.. Not every climate is suitable for veganism. Especially in the very dry and very cold. Here, hunting is much better. And viable.

But for most of the temperate climate it's better to be vegan environmentally.

You can't get away from that.
Think of the billions of animals farmed each year. The water used, the electricity / fossil fuels used. Waste disposal. Veterinary products. Human effort. Animal Waste gases.

People often say that we'd need loads more land forgetting that really, the same amount of effort is used for animal feed crops as people. There will be some additional effort sure. And it's not a direct like for like.

You could probably cut down 90+ percent of meat consumption and have plenty of land left. In UK we can human usable crops with all our land that we use for animal Feed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom