Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Bye bye MEAT! How will the post-meat future look?

How reluctant are you to give up your meat habit?

  • I’m already veggie or vegan as any right thinking person should be!

    Votes: 49 25.0%

  • I can take it or leave it, I won’t miss meat

    Votes: 31 15.8%

  • I’d give up meat if I could think what else to cook, but I can’t

    Votes: 7 3.6%

  • I’m reluctant to change, but I accept the need

    Votes: 34 17.3%

  • It’s unimaginable that I won’t have meat in most / all meals - I’ll probably starve

    Votes: 8 4.1%

  • Fuck the planet, I’ll be eating meat till I die or the planet explodes

    Votes: 6 3.1%

  • Poll fail, answer below

    Votes: 15 7.7%

  • Don’t believe the hype - meat will be available forever, nothing much will change

    Votes: 46 23.5%
  • Total voters
    196
Status
Not open for further replies.
You immediately lose credibility when you post opinion pieces by journalists (Monbiot) as opposed to scientific sources.
Monbiot is now well known for cherry picking research and misrepresenting it to suit his agenda.
I started pulling apart the first page of "Regenesis" on this thread.

It has now been done in a book (not mine): "Saying no to a Farm Free Future" by Chris Smaje.

Grazing on the uplands is complex as this extensive trial has shown - essentially it comes down to which species you want to conserve. Grazing hugely beneficial to some species, not so others.

Should we graze the uplands of Scotland? | SEFARI

More and more research is starting to show that ruminant agriculture, when managed correctly has the potential to both sequester masses of carbon and increase soil biodiversity. When you add to that that manure from these species is much better for the environment than synthetic fertiliser, its much more likely that this is part of the solution, not part of the problem.

It looks like the IPCC are coming round to this view too.
 
Monbiot is distinctly hand-wavy when he talks about this. He doesn't explain where the energy and nutrients for his techno-food will come from, nor what effects it will have on the environment. He doesn't explain how handing food production over to multinational corporations can produce the positive effects he wants. He also doesn't explain how rewilding would work in practice. It's not a case of 'just leave the land alone'. It's way more complicated than that and in places like the UK, it requires a great deal of planning and management to create viable 'wild' spaces.

It's a shame. Monbiot has some very good things to say about colonialism and its legacy, but imo he has a blind spot when it comes to agriculture because he is fundamentally opposed to animal farming in all its forms, and that comes first. That leads him to just ignore the consequences of handing over production to capitalist behemoths. His starting point isn't 'what's best for the environment', but rather 'what's best for the environment once we've stopped farming animals'. He should be a bit more honest about that.
 
littlebabyjesus said:
It's a shame. Monbiot has some very good things to say about colonialism and its legacy, but imo he has a blind spot when it comes to agriculture because he is fundamentally opposed to animal farming in all its forms, and that comes first. That leads him to just ignore the consequences of handing over production to capitalist behemoths. His starting point isn't 'what's best for the environment', but rather 'what's best for the environment once we've stopped farming animals'. He should be a bit more honest about that.
Click to expand...

If you read "Regenesis", he's now fundamentally apposed to farming (with apparently the exception of one veg grower he likes).
Seems he's realised that cropping can have very poor environmental consequences (especially soil loss) and decided that the solution is to throw out both the baby and the bathwater and have no farms or farming, but instead make the vast majority of our diet one that is synthetically produced in a massive factory.
 
Good piece in Vox a few days ago about food misinformation:

Madre Brava also conducted a media analysis that found that between 2020 and 2022, less than 0.5 percent of stories about climate change by leading news outlets in the US, the United Kingdom, and Europe mentioned meat or livestock.

Last month, two groups that work on issues related to animal agriculture — Sentient Media and Faunalytics — published an analysis with similar findings. The organizations looked at the 100 most recent climate change stories from each of the top 10 US media outlets, including the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, and CNN, and found that 7 percent mentioned animal agriculture. Of that 7 percent, most only discussed how climate change-fueled weather events like droughts, floods, and heatwaves impact animal farmers. “Across the 1,000 articles we examined, only a handful of stories reported in depth on the connection between consuming animal products and climate change,” the researchers wrote.
Click to expand...

The food misinformation environment that reporters swim in​

Estimates vary, but peer-reviewed research says that animal agriculture causes between 15 percent to 19.6 percent of climate-warming emissions. The United Nations’ most recent estimate puts animal agriculture’s emissions at 11.1 percent, but it hasn’t been peer-reviewed and has been questioned by some food and climate researchers.

Last month, journalist Sophie Kevany explained in detail for Vox why there’s such a wide range in estimates, but here’s the gist: It’s hard to measure emissions from farms, there’s evidence these emissions are undercounted, and different models use different carbon accounting methods.
Click to expand...

The range of estimates has left room for meat lobbyists to muddy the waters, creating an environment of misinformation and exaggeration.

For example, in recent years the beef industry has promoted a misleading method of counting the warming impact of methane, a highly potent greenhouse gas emitted by cows. “It’s the [beef] industry choosing metrics which make their impact look small,” Drew Shindell, a professor of Earth science at Duke University, told Bloomberg about the industry’s alternative math. “It’s not a credible way to approach the problem.”

The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, the industry’s leading lobby group, runs a “climate messaging machine,” food journalist Joe Fassler recently wrote in the Guardian, that trains influencers to confuse the public and downplay beef’s emissions.
Click to expand...

1688397761851.png

www.vox.com

Why the media too often ignores the connection between climate change and meat

The burger-sized hole in climate change coverage, explained.
www.vox.com www.vox.com
 
End of discussion.?

www.technologyreview.com

Here’s what we know about lab-grown meat and climate change

Cultivated meat is coming to the US. Whether it’ll clean up emissions from food is complicated.
www.technologyreview.com www.technologyreview.com


It’s still possible for cultivated meat to become a major positive for the climate, especially as renewables like wind and solar become more widely available. An industry where cells can be grown efficiently in massive reactors while being fed widely available ingredients, in a process all powered by renewable electricity, could be a significant way to help clean up our food system.
 
bcuster said:
End of discussion.?

www.technologyreview.com

Here’s what we know about lab-grown meat and climate change

Cultivated meat is coming to the US. Whether it’ll clean up emissions from food is complicated.
www.technologyreview.com www.technologyreview.com


It’s still possible for cultivated meat to become a major positive for the climate, especially as renewables like wind and solar become more widely available. An industry where cells can be grown efficiently in massive reactors while being fed widely available ingredients, in a process all powered by renewable electricity, could be a significant way to help clean up our food system.
Click to expand...
How much electricity does a cow use while eating grass? :hmm:
 
bcuster said:
End of discussion.?

www.technologyreview.com

Here’s what we know about lab-grown meat and climate change

Cultivated meat is coming to the US. Whether it’ll clean up emissions from food is complicated.
www.technologyreview.com www.technologyreview.com


It’s still possible for cultivated meat to become a major positive for the climate, especially as renewables like wind and solar become more widely available. An industry where cells can be grown efficiently in massive reactors while being fed widely available ingredients, in a process all powered by renewable electricity, could be a significant way to help clean up our food system.
Click to expand...

Not quite end of discussion I’d say, but I’d encourage everyone to read this article if they’re interested in the topic. It’s a very good piece of science and technology communication and a lot better than most of the sensationalist (both pro and anti cellular agriculture) pieces that are published.
 
bcuster said:
You don’t need to become a complete vegan to reduce, perhaps drastically so, your consumption of meat
Click to expand...
I don't eat lots of meat and the meat I do eat I know enough about to continue my intake without wishing for it to be grown in a lab.
bcuster said:
Someone is allergic to something everywhere
Click to expand...
I'm allergic to idiots who think laboritories are the answer to all our problems and not the cause ;)
 
I think I may be coming round to the idea of pretend meat grown in a lab. This thread seems to be mostly hard line vegans v I only buy well reared meat from my local butcher. And the very much larger middle ground is the chicken breast and wet packet ham that lots of people eat and aren’t that bothered about the provenance of.
The same companies will be producing pretty much the same product, but there might not be the horrible skyscraper pigs or ghastly battery chicken thing. Of course whatever they produce will have some lettuce in the photo on the packet and people will say ‘ooh plant based’ and not consider where their food came from but a lab def seems better than intensive battery farms
 
Saunders said:
I think I may be coming round to the idea of pretend meat grown in a lab. This thread seems to be mostly hard line vegans v I only buy well reared meat from my local butcher. And the very much larger middle ground is the chicken breast and wet packet ham that lots of people eat and aren’t that bothered about the provenance of.
Click to expand...
Not far off but for me there's more complexity to the argument. Being bothered about the provenance of the meat you eat is seen as niche and Tarquinistic on this thread but there's a lot of geographical difference in what the median line is also. I live in a semi rural location and have access to game, wild fish and traditional farmed meat that is a mile away from the high street of the metropolis and the shelves of the supermarkets.

Lots of folk care about the meat they eat and its the marketisation of the industry and supermarkets that are the problem for me. Growing food in laboratories is a forward extension of that problem alongside the associated market control, not a remedy to it. That's why I won't be eating it.

Lab grown meat will just replace smiley ham and turkey twizzlers.
 
friedaweed said:
Not far off but for me there's more complexity to the argument. Being bothered about the provenance of the meat you eat is seen as niche and Tarquinistic on this thread but there's a lot of geographical difference in what the median line is also. I live in a semi rural location and have access to game, wild fish and traditional farmed meat that is a mile away from the high street of the metropolis and the shelves of the supermarkets.

Lots of folk care about the meat they eat and its the marketisation of the industry and supermarkets that are the problem for me. Growing food in laboratories is a forward extension of that problem alongside the associated market control, not a remedy to it. That's why I won't be eating it.

Lab grown meat will just replace smiley ham and turkey twizzlers.
Click to expand...

Most supermarket beef and lamb is fine, as far as I'm concerned - chicken (as previously discussed) is problematic, as, potentially is pork - however, 40% of UK pork is outdoor reared, which is more "natural", but, as in nature, piglet mortality is higher (predators - crows are particularly bad for this, potential chilling etc). I have also lived in the country since I was 11ish and do have access to other meats (rabbit etc), but appreciate that not everyone does. People involved with deer culls are telling me that you can barely give venison away these days (I think someone told me he'd been offered sub £3/kg whole carcase), which is a shame, because there's millions of them, especially as lots of former sheep/dairy land became arable after the 1960s and thus, wild ruminants (deer) no longer had to compete with farmed ruminants for food.

Lab grown meat and synthetic meat substitutes are highly processed food - it amazes me that people can look at a turkey twizzler or shit sausage and think that the small proportion of them that is actually meat is the problem and not the rest of it.

re: marketisation - market share is the root of a fuckton of problems in the food chain, the power wielded by the big supermarkets is only ever bad for food production, where price (to the consumer) is king, the processor that adds value by bulking stuff out or exploits dodgy labour practices in Spain or Africa (in the case of veg) wins. Remove some of these middlemen and food could stay a similar price, but pay the small farmer a viable living.
 
Last edited:
"Last month, journalist Sophie Kevany explained in detail for Vox why there’s such a wide range in estimates, but here’s the gist: It’s hard to measure emissions from farms, there’s evidence these emissions are undercounted, and different models use different carbon accounting methods."

Whilst this is true, there is a strong tendency to under, rather than over estimate sequestration. Lots of carbon accounting is only capable of measuring the top 30cm or so of soil (some do soil depth to 1m, but they aren't common, possibly because they are more expensive) and things like hedgerows are completely left out of any carbon accounting. Also, there is work taking place around methanotrophs in pasture which "feed" on enteric methane, meaning that more methane is immediately removed when ruminants are at pasture as opposed to on feed lots.
 
Funky_monks said:
re: marketisation - market share is the root of a fuckton of problems in the food chain, the power wielded by the big supermarkets is only ever bad for food production, where price (to the consumer) is king, the processor that adds value by bulking stuff out or exploits dodgy labour practices in Spain or Africa (in the case of veg) wins. Remove some of these middlemen and food could stay a similar price, but pay the small farmer a viable living.
Click to expand...
Yup. preaching to the converted there mate.
 
New expose of the Irish dairy industry:

RTÉ broadcast footage that it said appeared to show serious breaches of animal welfare, with the footage showing slapping, striking and kicking of animals, all prohibited by law, as well as throwing them mid-air which is regarded as a serious breach of animal welfare.
Click to expand...

www.independent.ie

Dairy sector braces for fallout from RTÉ Investigates 'Milking it: Dairy's Dirty Secret' exposé

The dairy sector is bracing itself for the fallout from an RTÉ documentary aired last night which uncovered the mistreatment of young dairy calves at marts and investigated the controversial live calf export trade.
www.independent.ie www.independent.ie
 
bcuster said:
End of discussion.?

www.technologyreview.com

Here’s what we know about lab-grown meat and climate change

Cultivated meat is coming to the US. Whether it’ll clean up emissions from food is complicated.
www.technologyreview.com www.technologyreview.com


It’s still possible for cultivated meat to become a major positive for the climate, especially as renewables like wind and solar become more widely available. An industry where cells can be grown efficiently in massive reactors while being fed widely available ingredients, in a process all powered by renewable electricity, could be a significant way to help clean up our food system.
Click to expand...
End of food more like. Do you really want corporate controlled food? Or at least even more so. At least cows aren't copyright of Monsanto
 
Jeff Robinson said:
You think people can reform all the other things they post about on here? I presume you make that point every time somebody posts on the war in Ukraine for example?
Click to expand...
No i'm just tired of vegans hectoring people while ignoring whether or not it's a viable or suitable diet for the person they harangue.
 
Karl Masks said:
No i'm just tired of vegans hectoring people while ignoring whether or not it's a viable or suitable diet for the person they harangue.
Click to expand...

lol, by "hectoring" you mean sharing information about a mainstream documentary (which, by the way, has nothing to do with veganism)? If you want to be shielded from the reality of the industries you support (UK no different to Ireland) feel free to put me on ignore, or just don't bother clicking on threads like this.
 
Back to the subject at hand, which is agriculture and the environment, not some expose of some cases of bad practice in marts and haulage in Ireland, which some would desperately like to paint as "they way livestock agriculture is" because conformation bias.......

Since we all like the Guardian so much: Improving soil could keep world within 1.5C heating target, research suggests
We know that large ruminant agriculture (ie cows, buffalo, sheep) when grazing is managed correctly can build soils. We also know that the plough is the biggest cause of soil loss within the context of "developed world"agriculture (ie places where virgin land from cleared forests is not being farmed). So, veg, potatoes etc would be by far the worst culprits for this (some combinable crop land is ploughed, some isn't with the advent of direct drill/min till operations).

Part of the reason for this is that ploughing destroys soil fungal networks, as well as allowing for soil to be blown/washed away. Fungi are critical to sequestration and many many are mycorrhizal, including many pasture based species: Fungi stores a third of carbon from fossil fuel emissions and could be essential to reaching net zero

Nb - it should be obvious, but fungi cultured in vats to create synthetic food are not mycorrhizal - they are not associated with plant root networks.
 
And if we're taking about fossil fuel emissions, we always need to remember that the driver of climate change is the burning of fossil fuels that adds new carbon to the cycle, not current activities within the existing carbon cycle. That is what increases the levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, as we've covered on here several times.

And we are burning more fossil fuels every year (with a little covid-related blip). It's not even that we've plateaued due to knowing the damage. It's still increasing. That's where the behavioural challenge wrt global warming is located, not agriculture. Within agriculture, welfare, food quality and security, sustainability and biodiversity are the big challenges.

And doing a bit of maths on this, given that CO2 has a half-life in the atmosphere of 120 years, even a plateauing of FF emissions wouldn't stop the warming. It would just stop the acceleration of the warming. Even gradual reductions wouldn't stop the warming. It would just slow it down. And we're not even there yet.

These are all obvious points, but they can become lost when people start pontificating about cow burps.
 
Jeff Robinson said:
lol, by "hectoring" you mean sharing information about a mainstream documentary (which, by the way, has nothing to do with veganism)? If you want to be shielded from the reality of the industries you support (UK no different to Ireland) feel free to put me on ignore, or just don't bother clicking on threads like this.
Click to expand...
No, I mean harassing people so they lose their jobs without offering any kind of critique of capitalism, or an alternative for them. Or refusing to accept that some people cannot thrive on so restrictive a diet. Or generally being massively intolerant to the point of counter productive
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

danny la rouge
  • Poll
Is there the political will to do anything on climate change?
2 3 4
Replies
112
Views
5K
RubyToogood
RubyToogood
Aladdin
  • Poll
How can you stay warm when...
2 3 4
Replies
93
Views
4K
Aladdin
Aladdin
ska invita
Air pollution level by UK postcode
2
Replies
53
Views
2K
geminisnake
geminisnake
Back
Top Bottom