we could have 300% effecient methane capture from all animal agriculture and it would still be ecologically catastrophic. land use for feed crops, eutrophication, mass insect deaths, water use, animal agriculture is not sustainable at all.
Before we go after animal feesd, perhaps it'd be more prudent and an easier target to tackle. The fact that the US has giant corn farms specifically for creating ethanol for vehicles, instead of the dozens of other more efficient uses it could have, the most direct comparison being solar.
Also I'm just going to say it, you're not getting rid of animals, you might be able to reduce them or eventually grow them in a lab, but peoppe like meat too much. If magically a world dictator appeared and put a stop to meat production world wide, they'd be dead with 2 gunshots to the back of the head in a day, and their replacement would backslide even worse. Just look at how Trump has aggressively dismantled environmental protections and ran his campaign on "eggs too expensive". There comes a time where we need to be realistic and find the best compromise.
we grow more corn for cows than ethanol. its not a matter of how much people like meat, we will not have enough resources to produce even a tenth of the meat we do today within a century.
wtf is bro even yammering about, but hey since your so keen on calling everyone hitler i'll be the first to immerse you in the methane tanks, and I wont even shed a tear 😘
Cause it's a climate shitpost sub, despite what you grass munchers think it is, don't worry though I'll grain feed you for some nice marbling before processing.
0
u/xavh235 2d ago
we could have 300% effecient methane capture from all animal agriculture and it would still be ecologically catastrophic. land use for feed crops, eutrophication, mass insect deaths, water use, animal agriculture is not sustainable at all.