Comments on: Raising Beef is not Killing the Environment http://www.megatome.com/2009/06/07/raising-beef-is-not-killing-the-environment/ Just another idiot's ramblings Tue, 10 Jan 2012 21:18:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Anonymous http://www.megatome.com/2009/06/07/raising-beef-is-not-killing-the-environment/comment-page-1/#comment-463 Anonymous Fri, 22 Jul 2011 21:35:00 +0000 http://www.megatome.com/?p=65#comment-463 One thing that I've been unable to find so far is exactly why the amount of water for beef is so many orders of magnitude larger than for other animals and foodstuffs. I don't know if their digestive systems are less efficient at turning food into mass, or if it's something else. I certainly won't argue that there are lots of other consumables that require fewer resources, but I also think it's worthwhile to keep in mind that those other foodstuffs can't be grown one for one in the same places where cattle are raised. My dad's ranch has a lot of sloped and rocky area that can grow grass for cattle to eat, but it would be nearly impossible to grow a crop in this places. One thing that I’ve been unable to find so far is exactly why the amount of water for beef is so many orders of magnitude larger than for other animals and foodstuffs. I don’t know if their digestive systems are less efficient at turning food into mass, or if it’s something else.

I certainly won’t argue that there are lots of other consumables that require fewer resources, but I also think it’s worthwhile to keep in mind that those other foodstuffs can’t be grown one for one in the same places where cattle are raised. My dad’s ranch has a lot of sloped and rocky area that can grow grass for cattle to eat, but it would be nearly impossible to grow a crop in this places.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.megatome.com/2009/06/07/raising-beef-is-not-killing-the-environment/comment-page-1/#comment-462 Anonymous Fri, 22 Jul 2011 21:30:00 +0000 http://www.megatome.com/?p=65#comment-462 I took a look at the article cited in your link, and at the 2004 follow-up. The 2004 version cites a 43,000 l/kg number. If we convert the liters to gallons, this gives us around 11340 gallons, but that's still per kg. Making the necessary conversion to pounds gives us an estimate of ~5100 gallons per pound of beef. This is indeed larger than the 2,500 estimate, but it's not the nearly fivefold increase you're reporting. I took a look at the article cited in your link, and at the 2004 follow-up. The 2004 version cites a 43,000 l/kg number. If we convert the liters to gallons, this gives us around 11340 gallons, but that’s still per kg. Making the necessary conversion to pounds gives us an estimate of ~5100 gallons per pound of beef. This is indeed larger than the 2,500 estimate, but it’s not the nearly fivefold increase you’re reporting.

]]> By: Blm http://www.megatome.com/2009/06/07/raising-beef-is-not-killing-the-environment/comment-page-1/#comment-461 Blm Fri, 22 Jul 2011 19:44:00 +0000 http://www.megatome.com/?p=65#comment-461 2,500 gallons / pound is a gross under-estimate.  12,000 gallons is reported by a Cornell researcher calculating the amout of hay and grain going into a typical cow and the amount of water required to produce that feed. http://www.news.cornell.edu/releases/Jan97/water.hrs.html 2,500 gallons / pound is a gross under-estimate.  12,000 gallons is reported by a Cornell researcher calculating the amout of hay and grain going into a typical cow and the amount of water required to produce that feed.

http://www.news.cornell.edu/releases/Jan97/water.hrs.html

]]> By: Zifnab25 http://www.megatome.com/2009/06/07/raising-beef-is-not-killing-the-environment/comment-page-1/#comment-460 Zifnab25 Mon, 11 Jul 2011 17:38:00 +0000 http://www.megatome.com/?p=65#comment-460 While 441 gallons is substantially less than 2500, I would ask what the ratio is of beef to a non-beef substitute (chick, potatoes, etc). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_meat_production#Water_resources From the list to the right, it looks like meat consumes 4x as much water as poultry and around 15x as much water as most vegetables. I'd also ask "Is this expenditure valuable?" as I've read a number of health articles stressing the importance of a protein and fat rich diet.  Finally, I'd ask "Can we make the beef production process more efficient?" as we may be able to save more water by improving the beef industry as a whole rather than by trying to guilt die-hard tree huggers into becoming die-hard tree eaters. While 441 gallons is substantially less than 2500, I would ask what the ratio is of beef to a non-beef substitute (chick, potatoes, etc).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_meat_production#Water_resources

From the list to the right, it looks like meat consumes 4x as much water as poultry and around 15x as much water as most vegetables.

I’d also ask “Is this expenditure valuable?” as I’ve read a number of health articles stressing the importance of a protein and fat rich diet.  Finally, I’d ask “Can we make the beef production process more efficient?” as we may be able to save more water by improving the beef industry as a whole rather than by trying to guilt die-hard tree huggers into becoming die-hard tree eaters.

]]>