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

Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

news.ubc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 394 posts

Re: Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

#111

Post by blix »

pvaldes wrote: post #95
blix wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once meat is eradicated in the name of agricultural efficiency, non-grain, non-bean vegetables will probably be next on the chopping block.

You have a point here, yup. Some vegetables are luxury food, and less efficient than cattle. Replacing nature with monocultures is a problem. If we stop eating cattle for that, there is not moral room to keep eating chocolate, for example. Or coffee

Based on some rough napkin calculations, the caloric efficiency by land of broccoli is about the same as industrial meat.

Optimizing diet for land efficiency probably does not produce healthy diets. You can find strong evidence for this trade-off in the changes of average human health at the advent of agriculture.

Re: Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

#112

Post by boo_boo »

wongarsu wrote: post #66
coldpie wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup. We're already pretty much at capacity in terms of using arable farming land[1]. We need more efficient farming, which means GMOs and advanced farming methods; we don't need less efficient farming like organic and anti-GMO. [1] https://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/how-much-arabl...

Though we could feed many more people with current farming capacity if we ate all the corn we grow ourself instead of feeding it to cows that we eat. Meat production is incredibly inefficient. If we eventually manage to produce most of our meat demand from lab-grown meat this will likely free up enormous amounts of agriculture capacity.

In what world is lab-grown meat production more efficient than cattle farming?

Re: Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

#113

Post by rdtwo »

duhuh wrote: post #103
blix wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once meat is eradicated in the name of agricultural efficiency, non-grain, non-bean vegetables will probably be next on the chopping block.

I’m not sure why you’re being downvoted, but yes, as a society if we find that we are over-using resources, we should cut out those foods. We seem to value a human population numbered in the billions. Some foods won’t work for that population.

I don’t really see us worrying about food scarcity any time soon. We still burn the bulk of our corn as gas until that changes I see no issue with calorie shortages

Re: Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

#114

Post by vzidex »

pvaldes wrote: post #95
blix wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once meat is eradicated in the name of agricultural efficiency, non-grain, non-bean vegetables will probably be next on the chopping block.

You have a point here, yup. Some vegetables are luxury food, and less efficient than cattle. Replacing nature with monocultures is a problem. If we stop eating cattle for that, there is not moral room to keep eating chocolate, for example. Or coffee

>Some vegetables are luxury food, and less efficient than cattle

[Citation needed]

I'll assume you're arguing in good faith, but this argument is a common straw man made by people who are against plant-based diets. In fact, the only case where you have a point is that the worst case for chocolate produces more emissions than the best case for beef [1]. Odds are that if you're eating beef in North America it comes from a factory farm [2], while people who advocate for plant-based diets are often for more sustainable farming practices too, and will try to buy chocolate/coffee/avocados/whatever in sustainable ways.

Finally, the most important point is that it's not an either/or proposition - you can be _both_ for eating less meat, and producing plant products in more sustainable ways.

[1] https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-46459714

[2] https://www.huffpost.com/entry/its-time-to-end-factory-f_b_1...

Re: Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

#115

Post by dharma1 »

ping_pong wrote: post #79
dharma1 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some farmed fish (like tilapia) can live on a variety of things, including soy and corn pellets. Algae, which can be used for many things - human consumption, farmed animal/fish feed and even fuel - can also be farmed sustainably. I think we urgently need global legislation and enforcement of rules, as well as satellite monitoring to stop overfishing. World leaders need to work together on this. Marine ecosystems may…

In fact, tilapia from Vietnam and China are fed pig feces and packed in ice made from polluted water, which is why it's so dangerous to eat them. https://abcnews.go.com/Business/consumers-eating-feces-taint...

Yep, I wouldn't buy farmed fish from Asia.

Re: Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

#116

Post by saddlerustle »

zackmorris wrote: post #100

I'm shocked that the article didn't mention this, but the mass die-offs we're seeing are because the world's coral reefs will be dead by 2050: https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/environment-90-per... https://www.businessinsider.com/great-barrier-reef-could-dis... https://www.forbes.com/sites/trevornace/2020/02/24/70-90-per... The effect of this is that 500 million pacific islanders will be forced to flee to So…

> 500 million pacific islanders will be forced to flee to Southeast Asia

How the heck did you come up with this number? The entire population of Oceania excluding Australia, New Zealand and Papua New Guinea is 3 million.

Re: Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

#117

Post by duhuh »

pvaldes wrote: post #95
blix wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once meat is eradicated in the name of agricultural efficiency, non-grain, non-bean vegetables will probably be next on the chopping block.

You have a point here, yup. Some vegetables are luxury food, and less efficient than cattle. Replacing nature with monocultures is a problem. If we stop eating cattle for that, there is not moral room to keep eating chocolate, for example. Or coffee

If I eat seafood I rob from ocean species, illegal labor, the hungry poor, and the future. Sometimes, farmland represents the same problem, sometimes not. Seafood is an unsolved problem globally. It has no form of ethical consumption.

Re: Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

#118

Post by kingraoul3 »

aqme28 wrote: post #88
TN1ck wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> While I wish organically growing food and conservation was the answer, its unfortunately not. I recently had a lengthy discussion with some friends about their support of a solidary organic farm, where you pay a flat fee per month and get a box of whatever they have in that week. It's really hard for most people to understand that things like these are not sustainable and that it's purely a luxury product. Terms li…

I think there are confused definitions for "sustainable." There's "sustains the land," which is food that can be grown this way indefinitely, which is what most people mean when they say "sustainable agriculture." To be more specific, "meeting society's present food and textile needs, without compromising the ability for current or future generations to meet their needs." You're saying sustainable as in "can sustain…

Cuba has already shown the World the way forward with their Green Revolution.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/the-good-l...

Re: Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

#119

Post by hutzlibu »

albemuth wrote: post #86
palae wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While not giving up entirely, I feel like many people, if presented with facts, would be willing to greatly reduce their consumption.

> if presented with facts, would be willing to... Now that is SF

No, it is not. People just choose not to see the facts. People do not want to know where their food comes from as they suspect it would be not good to know as changing habits is hard and they have lots of other stuff going on to take care of.

But once they have seen movies like "we feed the world" they do care at least a bit.

Re: Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

#120

Post by ianleeclark »

palae wrote: post #72
ianleeclark wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't seem that most people are willing to give up meat/certain animal products.

While not giving up entirely, I feel like many people, if presented with facts, would be willing to greatly reduce their consumption.

No, the answer you'll get has an 85% chance of being, to the word, "Oh, I don't think I could ever give up bacon." I know that answer might seem a little far-fetched, but it will happen time and time again.

Facts don't really change anything when they're easy to ignore.

Post reply on HN