Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
Still Waters

Beef's greater environment burden

17 posts in this topic

A new study suggests that the production of beef is around 10 times more damaging to the environment than any other form of livestock.

Scientists measured the environment inputs required to produce the main US sources of protein.

Beef cattle need 28 times more land and 11 times more irrigation water than pork, poultry, eggs or dairy.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...onment-28409704

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

There's a new documentary called Cowspiracy that talks about the problems with the increasing number of cattle used to fuel the meat industry. The conspiracy title comes from the fact that almost no environmental organizations recognize or want to discuss this topic.

[media=]

[/media] Edited by redhen
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's settled. I'm quitting beef and I'm on an "all meat is bacon" diet.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The vegetarians will love to hear this :innocent:

If they didnt run the study themselves hehe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not at all surprised by this. I think it's a good thing there are studies going on about it.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure how much I believe in the Cowspiracy movie. It was directed by vegans Keegan Kuhn and Kip Anderson.

I'm sure the base accusations are mostly true, but I doubt the numbers they give.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I blame McDonalds :whistle:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure how much I believe in the Cowspiracy movie. It was directed by vegans Keegan Kuhn and Kip Anderson.

I'm sure the base accusations are mostly true, but I doubt the numbers they give.

You only have to understand the concept of trophic levels(the losses at each stage of a food pyramid) to understand that making beef is 90% wasteful of your basic resources compared to simply eating the green stuff yourself.

Its a crisis that will have to be addressed before long as serious starvation will result in all areas of the globe if it is not.

Br Cornelius

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You only have to understand the concept of trophic levels(the losses at each stage of a food pyramid) to understand that making beef is 90% wasteful of your basic resources compared to simply eating the green stuff yourself.

Its a crisis that will have to be addressed before long as serious starvation will result in all areas of the globe if it is not.

Br Cornelius

I do understand that eating vegetarian is better for the planet than eating meat. I just think that the numbers put forward are most likely overblown.

I'll admit that I am part of the problem. I eat meat. I also drive an automobile, use electricity, burn wood for heat and use plastic garbage bags.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well there are benefits to free range beef - hay fields and pastures are building topsoil and so long as you don't overgraze the land, will continue to do so. The problem stems from factory farms... and all the filth associated with them. Cheers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very little beef is free range, and if it was beef would cost 10 times its current price or more.

Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I blame McDonalds :whistle:

McDonald's has a little problem: the Chinese government shut down the plant that furnished them with meat. Seems it was repackaging outdated meat and shipping it as fresh. How bad does it have to be for the Chinese government to step in?

Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very little beef is free range, and if it was beef would cost 10 times its current price or more.

Br Cornelius

The optimum use of resources would still include a little beef. There are ranges that simply cannot be used to grow row crops - too rocky, too dry, too steep - that can nevertheless produce beef.

Doug

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One has to wonder how long until cows went extinct if humans didn't eat them or drink their milk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One has to wonder how long until cows went extinct if humans didn't eat them or drink their milk.

If humans hadn't hunted them to extinction, the wild auroch (ancestor of domestic cattle) would still be around.

Doug

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One has to wonder how long until cows went extinct if humans didn't eat them or drink their milk.

There is enough diversity in domestic cattle that a viable wild species would emerge fairly rapidly. Cattle are perfectly adapted to savannah of which there would be large amounts going ungrazed after a human collapse.

Br Cornelius

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About a month ago a press release from Washington D. C.'s White House made the papers hoping for further study on bovine flatulence. But the gas coming out of the capitol city overwhelmed the study!

I read this news in yesterday's paper and it stank yesterday, just the same as today. :td:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.