• psud@aussie.zoneM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    18 days ago

    Have you not heard about the tons of fertilisers needed for crops?

    • klankin@piefed.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      18 days ago

      Yeah, the issue is livestock eat crops to energise themselves, so livestock inheritly requires exponentially more fertiliser than just the crops would.

      • jet@hackertalks.comOPM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        18 days ago

        ruminants eat grass, which humans cannot eat, and turn it into protein, which humans can eat… grass grows on land that humans can’t use to grow crops… and even crops humans do grow cannot be fully eaten by humans, something like 70% of the biomass from cropland is not consumable by humans… which we turn into human food by feeding to to animals that can eat it.

        • klankin@piefed.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          18 days ago

          30% is still quite a lot (much more than just eating a plant!), and the land still has uses beyond just farmland.

          • jet@hackertalks.comOPM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            18 days ago

            https://www.agriculture.gov.au/sites/default/files/images/abares-snapshot-2026-2-land.png

            Land use Million hectares % of Australia % of Agricultural land
            Cropping + horticulture 43.60 5.67% 9.9%
            Grazing animals 382.87 49.80% 87.2%

            https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2022.108852

            you will see they are already farming everywhere they can farm…

            it wouldn’t be “efficient” to ignore 88% of your productive land… and even if you do ignore it, the sun still shines on it, the grass still grows on it… something is going to eat that grass, even if it’s just bacteria… so the ecology is going to keep marching forward no matter what, that is why its a biocycle

            • texture@lemmy.worldBanned from community
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              17 days ago

              how do you not understand that the more meat we consume, the more the crops that need to be grown? the vast majority of farmed animal meat is grown with far more crops than it would ever take to just feed people the plants. its incredibly simple arithmetic.

              • jet@hackertalks.comOPM
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                17 days ago

                Unfortunately, simple and true are often at odds

                Most crop biomass is not edible by humans, so that 70% of biomass we can’t eat is fed to animals. That doesn’t mean the crops are grown exclusively for animals, it’s just an industrial efficiency

                It seems like you were not able to look at the map, 88% of the food producing land of Australia is only suitable for grazing animals, to make meat

                • ltxrtquq@lemmy.mlBanned from community
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  15 days ago

                  I guess there are no consequences to flooding a land with non-native cows or sheep or whatever and letting them eat everything in sight. Or even just artificially increasing the native population of your choice to do the same.

                  • jet@hackertalks.comOPM
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    15 days ago

                    If you start with the premiss that humans need to live and be healthy - and work backwards from there, you end up with ruminants and land conservation

            • klankin@piefed.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              17 days ago

              You could use the same argument to throw a datacenter there, but just because nature is undistributed doesn’t mean we need to disturb it.

              Efficiency also includes space efficiency, as we have destroyed more habitats in the past hundred years than some extinction events.

      • jet@hackertalks.comOPM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        17 days ago

        GRASS, I know you know it’s grass because you responded to the comment with the grazable pastoral GRASS LAND map.