Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Going Vegan Won’t Save the Planet

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 119 posts

Re: Going Vegan Won’t Save the Planet

#51

Post by [deleted] »

falcolas wrote: post #34
vzidex wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Current generation here (I'm 20). There's a lot of steps you can take without decreasing your quality of life - is that cut of steak _really_ that important to your quality of life? If, aware of the problem of climate change AND of the solutions, you choose to do nothing then you won't just be an asshole in the eyes of the next 20 generations, you're an asshole in the eyes of my generation too.

It's not just steak. It's tacos, hamburgers, roasted (or friend) turkey, pork chops, ham, BLTs, chicken tenders, milk, cheese, lattes, milk chocolate, white bread, clam chowder (any chowder for that matter), sushi... The list of non-vegan foods is quite long. > you're an asshole in the eyes of my generation too. I'm willing to accept that. The hate of a group of anonymous people is something I have no problems with.

[deleted]

Re: Going Vegan Won’t Save the Planet

#52

Post by vfc1 »

jakewins wrote: post #37
vfc1 wrote: post #3

> farms growing crops have been just as destructive as those raising animals This comparison does not make sense. What this reporter and the public, in general, fail to realize still in 2019, is that most of the farms producing crops are doing so to produce cattle feed. The majority of agricultural fields are planted to feed livestock, not humans. Only a relatively small amount of crops goes directly to humans. This…

Some plants have exceptional environmental properties; things like soy, oats (0.1g CO2e/kcal!!) and potatoes. Others are worse than eating meat; if you get your calories from fresh tomatoes (12.22g CO2e/kcal, heated greenhouse) you have an order-of-magnitude higher impact than if you get it from chicken (~1.58g CO2e/kcal, depending on part). The food system is not easily grouped into "climate-conscious" and "bad"; a…

I mean come on, a diet of 100% tomatoes does not make any sense, right?

The bulk of human calories on a whole food plant based diet comes typically from beans, legumes chickpeas, soy, root vegetables like potatoes and sweet potatoes, starches in general, grains like whole rice, quinoa, etc.

Then another good portion of the calories typically comes from fruit, and another good portion comes from vegetables and salads.

A diet of 100% tomatoes does not make any sense from a nutritional perspective, they are mostly water, but they are a good addition to a balanced whole food plant-based diet.

Re: Going Vegan Won’t Save the Planet

#53

Post by falcolas »

loblollyboy wrote: post #33
falcolas wrote: post #14

I'm going to say something very unpopular: If your plan to save the world includes requiring all 9 billion people to fundamentally change their lives (especially if its perceived as a degradation of their current quality of life), it's never going to work. Now I'll speak for myself. I will not go vegan, given the current offering of vegan foodstuffs. It just doesn't taste as good. I know it may be better for me than…

I agree we are probably past the point of no return and I am a (non-orthodox) pescetarian (sp?). Here is why... I have never owned a car and bike everywhere and I also basically just eat peanut butter+jelly/ cereal/ 'rabbit food' as my old HS XC used to call it - and try to stay alive by also drinking kefir. This is all because I am cheap and lazy and increasingly set in my ways. So I do not really have a decrease in…

One does not need to eat meat with every meal to still enjoy eating meat. Salads, tofu, pasta, all make great meals. But so do ham sandwiches, BLTs, and yes, the occasional steak.

> animal that suffered a lot for your increased quality of life

How much sea life has suffered to ship your computer from china to you? How many people suffered in the conditions used to build your computer? How many people suffered and died mining the materials used in your computer?

How many people have suffered and died to provide you with electricity? How many migrant workers suffered in the sun for low wages to provide you with the fruits used in your jelly?

Suffering is not limited to animals to provide us with the life we're living.

Re: Going Vegan Won’t Save the Planet

#55

Post by jakewins »

nicoburns wrote: post #42
jakewins wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some plants have exceptional environmental properties; things like soy, oats (0.1g CO2e/kcal!!) and potatoes. Others are worse than eating meat; if you get your calories from fresh tomatoes (12.22g CO2e/kcal, heated greenhouse) you have an order-of-magnitude higher impact than if you get it from chicken (~1.58g CO2e/kcal, depending on part). The food system is not easily grouped into "climate-conscious" and "bad"; a…

Nobody really eats tomatoes for the calories though. People (with meat-based or plant-based diets) use tomatoes for flavour and other nutrients.

Tomato pastas like pomodoro and putanesca were my go-to lunches before I learned about this, and tomato soups remain super popular, so I disagree that they are simply a condiment.

Still, perhaps they are a bad general example.

Perhaps a better one would be rice (~2g CO2e/kcal). There the problem is the massive methane emissions produced from the cultivation approach.

Point being: There are huge differences between different foods, and they are non-obvious.

Re: Going Vegan Won’t Save the Planet

#56

Post by natethegreatt »

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #28
vfc1 wrote: post #3

> farms growing crops have been just as destructive as those raising animals This comparison does not make sense. What this reporter and the public, in general, fail to realize still in 2019, is that most of the farms producing crops are doing so to produce cattle feed. The majority of agricultural fields are planted to feed livestock, not humans. Only a relatively small amount of crops goes directly to humans. This…

Farms grow crops that you can't eat, to feed to animals that you can. Name the protein and fat sources that will replace meat. Tofu? We already grow soy for animal feed as a cash crop and it's pesticide and fertilizer intensive, and if people eat it directly instead of as an animal feed additive its production will grow at the expense of forests and soil health. Nuts? I'm all for perennial woody agriculture, but the…

The only nutrient deficiency that is rather difficult to circumvent with a vegan diet is Vitamin B. Meat is one of the only places humans can obtain it.

Everything else is trivial to obtain via plants.

Re: Going Vegan Won’t Save the Planet

#57

Post by mancerayder »

baxtr wrote: post #50
cmrdporcupine wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Farms grow crops that you can't eat, to feed to animals that you can. Name the protein and fat sources that will replace meat. Tofu? We already grow soy for animal feed as a cash crop and it's pesticide and fertilizer intensive, and if people eat it directly instead of as an animal feed additive its production will grow at the expense of forests and soil health. Nuts? I'm all for perennial woody agriculture, but the…

How much protein do you think a normal person needs? Valter Longo recommends ".31 to 0.36 grams per pound of body weight). That comes to 40 to 47 grams of proteins per day for a person weighing 130 pounds, and 60 to 70 grams of protein per day for someone weighing 200 to 220 pounds." Why would you really need meat at all if those numbers are correct? https://valterlongo.com/daily-longevity-diet-for-adults/

Normal person?

What about abnormal athletes, or people who do weight training?

How many peas are required if you want both a calorie surplus and 1 to 1.5 grams of protein per lb of body weight?

Re: Going Vegan Won’t Save the Planet

#58

Post by jakewins »

vfc1 wrote: post #52
jakewins wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some plants have exceptional environmental properties; things like soy, oats (0.1g CO2e/kcal!!) and potatoes. Others are worse than eating meat; if you get your calories from fresh tomatoes (12.22g CO2e/kcal, heated greenhouse) you have an order-of-magnitude higher impact than if you get it from chicken (~1.58g CO2e/kcal, depending on part). The food system is not easily grouped into "climate-conscious" and "bad"; a…

I mean come on, a diet of 100% tomatoes does not make any sense, right? The bulk of human calories on a whole food plant based diet comes typically from beans, legumes chickpeas, soy, root vegetables like potatoes and sweet potatoes, starches in general, grains like whole rice, quinoa, etc. Then another good portion of the calories typically comes from fruit, and another good portion comes from vegetables and salads.…

You're right, it's a poor example. I guess I was thinking of tomato pastas and tomato soups, for instance.

A better one, like you mention, is rice - again a crop with substantially worse carbon impact than chicken.

Fruits are even more complex - if you get them in season, locally and actually eat them, they are fantastic. If you buy them out of season, due to their short shelf-life you'll find they are often air shipped and have outsize waste at the retail level. Avocado is a good example here, water issues aside. In season they have a small impact, out of season they are air-shipped from South America to the rest of the world.

My point being: There are large and non-obvious differences, and they do not clearly align with traditional diets.

Re: Going Vegan Won’t Save the Planet

#60

Post by vfc1 »

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #28
vfc1 wrote: post #3

> farms growing crops have been just as destructive as those raising animals This comparison does not make sense. What this reporter and the public, in general, fail to realize still in 2019, is that most of the farms producing crops are doing so to produce cattle feed. The majority of agricultural fields are planted to feed livestock, not humans. Only a relatively small amount of crops goes directly to humans. This…

Farms grow crops that you can't eat, to feed to animals that you can. Name the protein and fat sources that will replace meat. Tofu? We already grow soy for animal feed as a cash crop and it's pesticide and fertilizer intensive, and if people eat it directly instead of as an animal feed additive its production will grow at the expense of forests and soil health. Nuts? I'm all for perennial woody agriculture, but the…

> Name the protein and fat sources that will replace meat.

All sorts of beans like soybeans and others, legumes, chickpeas, lentils, tempeh and tofu yes are good products. More than enough protein to feed people, much healthier too.

Look ,its just not true there is nothing magical about meat. It's highly environmentally impactful and completely optional.

Post reply on HN