• w00tabaga@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    To think that getting rid of those two things is a silver bullet is naive.

    People like to shit on animal agriculture. However, you have to consider that only about 3% of the earth’s entire surface is suitable for agriculture, and even less to grow most of the crops we eat. Animals can be raised on land that’s not suitable for crops. It spreads out where we use our water, which is a good thing. Animal agriculture also gives us a plethora of goods besides just meat, and again, it’s goods from land that otherwise we cannot farm.

    As with all things in life, there are better and worse ways to go about it, but animal agriculture isn’t ruining the planet in itself.

    Secondly, the problem with biofuels is it should be replaced with nuclear, and getting hungry isn’t going to change that, a lot of people are just going to die from starvation and violence directly caused by starvation.

    • neanderthal@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Let’s stop to think about this. The US is farming water intensive crops in the desert. Iowa and surrounding states, some of the best farmland in the world, grows a shitload of corn to make ethanol to add to ICE engine fuel. The energy return on investment is minimal and ethanol trashes small engines that usually aren’t designed to run on it.

      We could stop farming in the desert and use our premier farm land to grow food instead of for making low quality ICE fuel. We should be phasing out ICE engines as much as possible anyway, so we can get a double whammy here.

    • 9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Animal agriculture is not ruining the planet itself, yes.

      But

      Animal Agriculture emits nearly 60% of greenhouse gases from food production.