245
submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) by usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml to c/aboringdystopia@lemmy.world

Source link

EDIT: changed title to reflect that the original place saying the quote was the Hog Farm Management magazine rather than the Washington Post. The photo itself is from an article in the Washington post

top 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Sanguine@lemmy.world 43 points 10 months ago

Add another reason to the pile in favor of giving up or significantly reducing meat consumption.

[-] prowess2956@kbin.social 5 points 10 months ago

Totally agree when the meat is produced by an industrial model. I think there are regenerative models that are [more] sustainable in ecological and economic terms.

[-] usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml 23 points 10 months ago

It's unfortunately largely greenwashing. Animal products have a lot of fundamental inefficiency that really can't be reduced all that much

Plant-based foods have a significantly smaller footprint on the environment than animal-based foods. Even the least sustainable vegetables and cereals cause less environmental harm than the lowest impact meat and dairy products [9].

https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/14/8/1614/htm

If I source my beef or lamb from low-impact producers, could they have a lower footprint than plant-based alternatives? The evidence suggests, no: plant-based foods emit fewer greenhouse gases than meat and dairy, regardless of how they are produced.

Plant-based protein sources – tofu, beans, peas and nuts – have the lowest carbon footprint. This is certainly true when you compare average emissions. But it’s still true when you compare the extremes: there’s not much overlap in emissions between the worst producers of plant proteins, and the best producers of meat and dairy.

https://ourworldindata.org/less-meat-or-sustainable-meat

Livestock farmers often claim that their grazing systems “mimic nature”. If so, the mimicry is a crude caricature. A review of evidence from over 100 studies found that when livestock are removed from the land, the abundance and diversity of almost all groups of wild animals increases

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/aug/16/most-damaging-farm-products-organic-pasture-fed-beef-lamb

[-] prowess2956@kbin.social 0 points 10 months ago

How do you keep soil fertility up with no animal inputs?

[-] usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml 10 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Largely with the same main fertilizer used today, synthetic fertilizer (and ideally compost as well), but counterintuitively it takes much less synthetic fertilizer due to removing the large amount of feed grown. That's even compared to using as much manure as possible

Thus, shifting from animal to plant sources of protein can substantially reduce fertilizer requirements, even with maximal use of animal manure

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921344922006528

[-] qyron@sopuli.xyz -3 points 10 months ago

Synthetic fertilizers are essentially processed oil and we already know what the extraction, transport, processing and distribution of it entails.

Integrated farming, where animals are integral parts of a well planned farm operation present more advantages than drawbacks.

Animals help in manage soil and landscape (by eating plants that can easily out compete or swarm cultivation areas), can combat pests (chickens and other birds will eat pests naturally present in the soil and areate it in the process), provide fertilizer and can even compost and correct it (chickens and pigs can be used to turn manure piles), which implies less machinery employed.

Goats and sheep are superb at managing dry vegetation or any kind of foliage that can present a fire hazard. Pigs are natural soil plowers, capable of removing stones, stumps and deep roots. Chickens are good to level and clear soil, very fast, and excel at keep tree roots clean of weeds. Angola chickens can clear a field from ticks and other potential parasites very fast.

We do have other sources of soil nutrients that do not entail processing oil but the farmers are often not aware or unreceptive to it.

[-] usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml 6 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Yes, but it takes less synthetic fertilizer overall at scale per the earlier source even compared to using maximum amount of manure possible

That's not to mention crop rotation and compost as well which are methods that can still be employed to reduce fertilizer usage further on plant-based systems

[-] qyron@sopuli.xyz 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

The first issue we need to take is using synthetic fertilizer.

We already recognize oil is more of a source of problems than anything else: runaway methane leaks at the wells, soil polution, water polution, spills during transport, high energy consumption for processing, etc.

Manures are already available elements that only need to be reintegrated into the soil.

Composting operations also greatly benefit by having manures added to it (and manures technically require composting before use) as the bacteria from the animals digestive tract help breakdowm the material.

And yes, crop rotation and field management are essential but the more tried and tested techniques and resources we can use to shake away our dependency of oil, the better.

One lesser known source of nitrogen and phosphorous very under used: waste water management plants muds. Many countries are still sending precious resource for landfills.

[-] deegeese@sopuli.xyz -4 points 10 months ago

IDK, they had me at “sausage machine”.

[-] Spendrill@lemm.ee 28 points 10 months ago

The breeding sow should be thought of, and treated as, a valuable piece of machinery whose function is to pump out baby pigs like a sausage machine.

The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.

[-] Nacktmull@lemm.ee 26 points 10 months ago

You can stop buying industrially produced meat today.

[-] BruceTwarzen@kbin.social 10 points 10 months ago

But how am i supposed to enjoy breakfast without my shit eating animal that has never seen the sunlight?

[-] streetfestival@lemmy.ca 17 points 10 months ago

This line of thinking applies not only to individual animals but to how we're managing our biosphere as well. Humans allocate more land (27%) for 'livestock' than any other purpose on this planet: How the world's land is used: total area sizes by type of use and cover

[-] Rhaedas@kbin.social 4 points 10 months ago

It applies in many places. After all, H.R. stands for Human Resources, and that doesn't mean Resources for the Human Workers.

[-] withnail@infosec.pub 14 points 10 months ago

I mean they do that with people, so why not pigs too?

[-] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 13 points 10 months ago

Yeah, I feel like people trying to humanize livestock aren't familiar with how capitalists treat most people. There are preschool children mining toxic metals we need for our cell phone batteries. We know this, and while not one of us is in a position to change it ourselves, we all collectively look the other way because we want cell phones.

It's not that we don't care, it's that we feel powerless to fix it and we benefit from the atrocity. If you want people to engage, you have to make people believe they can help. And then they actually have to help somehow.

[-] blazeknave@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

I thought this was an Animal Farm reference about people at first anyway.

[-] yamsham@lemm.ee 8 points 10 months ago

This title is a bit misleading, this isn’t the Washington post saying this, they are just reporting a hog farm manager having said this in 1976

[-] usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml 15 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Updated the title to clarify. Wasn't a random hog farm manager, Hog Farm Management is a magazine read by hog farmers.

Here's the actual magazine page. It's not as readable so I used an article from the Washington Post talking about that:

this post was submitted on 07 Jan 2024
245 points (96.2% liked)

A Boring Dystopia

9771 readers
502 users here now

Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.

Rules (Subject to Change)

--Be a Decent Human Being

--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title

--If a picture is just a screenshot of an article, link the article

--If a video's content isn't clear from title, write a short summary so people know what it's about.

--Posts must have something to do with the topic

--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.

--No NSFW content

--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS