31–40 of 679 posts
Interestingly it doesn't even discuss the obvious solution: Let people who buy real meat pay for the externalities. (Interestingly even in places where there's some form of carbon pricing - like the EU - this often doesn't cover a large share of emissions from meat production, as methane emissions are very relevant here - I'm not aware of any methane pricing scheme anywhere.)
In general, it seems there needs to be something deeper done. Something is deeply wrong when cutting out the inefficient middle-man (the animal that converts plants to meat) somehow ends up with a product that’s MORE expensive.
Cows and livestock eat plants and convert into meat. It’s natural and organic and proven process that’s been around for thousands of years. Ground up plants with food colorings and odd shapes are not meat.
> It’s natural and organic and proven process that’s been around for thousands of years. Which is a good example how "natural" and "been around for thousands of years" does not equal "is good for the environment".
Interestingly it doesn't even discuss the obvious solution: Let people who buy real meat pay for the externalities. (Interestingly even in places where there's some form of carbon pricing - like the EU - this often doesn't cover a large share of emissions from meat production, as methane emissions are very relevant here - I'm not aware of any methane pricing scheme anywhere.)
I'm far more interested in cultured/clean meat grown from real cells.
Are there any commercial products and has anyone tried it? I do recall some video somewhere of a US restaurant and people said it was reasonable but that could have been plant based.
Cows and livestock eat plants and convert into meat. It’s natural and organic and proven process that’s been around for thousands of years. Ground up plants with food colorings and odd shapes are not meat.
> It’s natural and organic and proven process that’s been around for thousands of years. Which is a good example how "natural" and "been around for thousands of years" does not equal "is good for the environment".
People should demand and buy better meat from better farms with better practices.
Interestingly it doesn't even discuss the obvious solution: Let people who buy real meat pay for the externalities. (Interestingly even in places where there's some form of carbon pricing - like the EU - this often doesn't cover a large share of emissions from meat production, as methane emissions are very relevant here - I'm not aware of any methane pricing scheme anywhere.)
I am not sure how healthy these options are but I suspect that substituting minced meat patties, for mashed vegetables glued together with cheap vegetable oils is not an nutritional improvement.
Interesting how all the Silicon Valley brainiacs here on HN are far more interested in discussing the semantics of “meat” than the technology or economics. Kind of disappointing, really.
Words are important. Kind of disappointing that you fail to understand that, really.
Also it’s irrelevant to the content of the article.
Cows and livestock eat plants and convert into meat. It’s natural and organic and proven process that’s been around for thousands of years. Ground up plants with food colorings and odd shapes are not meat.
> It’s natural and organic and proven process that’s been around for thousands of years. Which is a good example how "natural" and "been around for thousands of years" does not equal "is good for the environment".
Not to mention how terrible plant-based “meats” are for your health.