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

Most of the world’s grain is not eaten by humans

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 314 posts

Re: Most of the world’s grain is not eaten by humans

#161

Post by ledauphin »

Retric wrote: post #154
AussieWog93 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole point of GP's post is that you can't grow corn everywhere. There is some soil that only supports grass, and the most efficient way to extract nutritional value from this land is through grazing animals.

Irrigation lets you grow corn or other crops just about anywhere. The availability of irrigation is largely a solvable problem. In the US for example the east coast, Alaska etc gets plenty of fresh water which just ends up in the ocean.

kind of ironic that this discussion seems to have come full circle w/r/t to unsustainable irrigation...

Re: Most of the world’s grain is not eaten by humans

#162

Post by rogerclark »

jacobsievers wrote: post #124
orionion wrote: post #34

The grass family contains over 9,000 species distributed throughout the world. Of that, 35 have been cultivated as cereals. Of these, the following are important today: Barley, Corn, Goat grass, Millet, Oats, Rice, Sorghum, and Wheat. Of the important grains and/or cereals listed above, only corn (maize) is a New World native. Corn is an important member of the grass family. Corn (Zea mays) was domesticated from a wi…

>Of the important grains and/or cereals listed above... I'm not sure what you meant to communicate with "and/or", but "and" would probably have sufficed.

Minor writing nitpicks are worse than useless. The parent comment provided actual information that someone might want to know.

Re: Most of the world’s grain is not eaten by humans

#163

Post by chii »

HWR_14 wrote: post #160
robocat wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And in 20 years time, it will be your turn to be retroactively punished for currently belonging to a society that is burning the world?

1) It's not group membership, it's targetted 2) I try to live in such a way that I'm not a wasteful glutton who misuses communal resources.

it might be that you get punished despite trying to live properly as you claim in 2).

Punishment doesn't work in this context, since it's not a repeated game. Murder is punished because everyone has the chance to do murder - it's a "repeated" game. Destroying the environment isn't.

Re: Most of the world’s grain is not eaten by humans

#164

Post by heretogetout »

ncmncm wrote: post #119
heretogetout wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm responding to "people disagree with the notion that reducing meat consumption is helpful from an emissions perspective". People may disagree but it's like disagreeing that 100 > 1 -- who cares what they think?

What it says is > "not ... that people disagree"

Right you are...

Re: Most of the world’s grain is not eaten by humans

#165

Post by heretogetout »

zamfi wrote: post #55
heretogetout wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't the math clear that meat consumption requires more emissions than non-meat consumption, on average (as in per calorie)?

Did I say somewhere that meat consumption is not problematic?

Sorry, I managed to misread your comment a few times.

Re: Most of the world’s grain is not eaten by humans

#166

Post by justapassenger »

MrMan wrote: post #126
justapassenger wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’re many ways people can reduce their impact on environment. Buying $60k+ luxury cars isn’t one. Reducing amount of meat can be, but you can give a shit and reduce your impact much more while still eating a lot of meat. People screaming that unless you reduce meat intake you’re killing earth are as narrowly minded focused on single issue as people screaming that unless you buy an EV, you’re killing earth.

not true not true

Ok, so compare two:

1. Vegetarian, living in a McMansion in an USA suburb in a desert, driving big SUV everywhere and flying for work every month to the other coast.

2. Meat eater, living car free in a small flat in London, taking subway everywhere and train to travel for work to Manchester.

Is meat eating part most impactful life choice they’re making?

Re: Most of the world’s grain is not eaten by humans

#167

Post by jazzyjackson »

Retric wrote: post #156
collegeburner wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes it is. Cows can eat only grass and still get enough protein. Vegetarians can not do that and still get enough protein. They have to eat other plants as well. Those plants do not grow everywhere.

Humans can extract enough protein in terms of grams from grasses like wheat as long as their daily activity level is high enough to burn sufficient carbohydrates. We have more complex dietary needs, but daily protein requirements aren’t actually that high. https://www.nutritionix.com/food/wheat/100g Wheat 15g of protein per 100g or 329 calories. That’s 114g on a 2,500 calorie diet.

eating cereals is eating the seed, not the grass

ruminants are able to digest cellulose, it's basically what they have extra stomachs for, so they can have different chemistries that are livable for the cellulose digesting bacteria

Re: Most of the world’s grain is not eaten by humans

#168

Post by Retric »

jazzyjackson wrote: post #167
Retric wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Humans can extract enough protein in terms of grams from grasses like wheat as long as their daily activity level is high enough to burn sufficient carbohydrates. We have more complex dietary needs, but daily protein requirements aren’t actually that high. https://www.nutritionix.com/food/wheat/100g Wheat 15g of protein per 100g or 329 calories. That’s 114g on a 2,500 calorie diet.

eating cereals is eating the seed, not the grass ruminants are able to digest cellulose, it's basically what they have extra stomachs for, so they can have different chemistries that are livable for the cellulose digesting bacteria

It’s a meaningless distinction. Ruminants aren’t eating the full plant either, the roots stay in place.

And of course it’s a moot discussion. Directly eating the seeds is vastly more efficient than cattle eating both especially when their primarily eating seeds in the US.

Re: Most of the world’s grain is not eaten by humans

#169

Post by Retric »

ledauphin wrote: post #161
Retric wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Irrigation lets you grow corn or other crops just about anywhere. The availability of irrigation is largely a solvable problem. In the US for example the east coast, Alaska etc gets plenty of fresh water which just ends up in the ocean.

kind of ironic that this discussion seems to have come full circle w/r/t to unsustainable irrigation...

Unsustainable irrigation is just cheaper than sustainable irrigation. It doesn’t mean unsustainable irrigation is the only option.
Post reply on HN