Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Milk's impact on the planet dairy, soya, rice, oat and almond compared

editor said:
Because I'm interested to learn how many people would still have to eat meat and why if 100% veganism became a practical option.
Click to expand...
Have to? Very few. Want to is the question, no? How many people see no problem with the idea of raising animals in order to kill and eat them? That this is the real sticking point here - how many people have a genuine problem with the idea of meat? I don't, and I think there are a lot of people like me. It's not just ignorance or denial about the realities of killing.
 
editor said:
That's absolute rubbish. You need far less land (and resources) for a vegan diet.
Click to expand...
This is so simplistic as to be effective nonsense though. Resources and climatic conditions, to name but two, aren't spread evenly around all the world.

What can be farmed depends on various local circumstances, and these local variations are a huge part of why different things are farmed in different places, including why Ireland with its wet mild climate is far better for raising dairy cattle than for growing almonds.
 
TruXta said:
So..... You just undermined your own point about not being over reliant on one crop?
Click to expand...

Please stop being ignorant.
The Irish starved because the ONLY crop they were allowed grow for themselves were potatoes. They worked for landlords(British)..and the produce grown on landlords land was taken and sent to england.

Their own paltry potato crops grown by themselves failed due to blight.
Twice. Result...was that Irish people died. 1.5 million.
 
andysays said:
This is so simplistic as to be effective nonsense though. Resources and climatic conditions, to name but two, aren't spread evenly around all the world.

What can be farmed depends on various local circumstances, and these local variations are a huge part of why different things are farmed in different places, including why Ireland with its wet mild climate is far better for raising dairy cattle than for growing almonds.
Click to expand...
Oh Christ. Not the fucking almonds again.
 
editor said:
Oh Christ. Not the fucking almonds again.
Click to expand...
It is a simplistic dichotomy, though. Mixed farming with crop rotation can be done sustainably with meat and dairy added into the mix, while some land is not suited to much other than sheep farming - hill farms in Wales for instance, so the choice there isn't 'meat or veg'; it is 'meat or nothing'. Lapps have little option other than to eat reindeer if their way of life is to be sustainable.

Which are the most important questions here? For me, the most pressing concern is the unsustainable nature of most monoculture, whether that is done for animal feed or to feed humans. We absolutely need to move away from factory-farmed animals, but move away from that towards what? Insisting on only a simplistic vegan or bust isn't really helpful in that debate.
 
littlebabyjesus said:
It is a simplistic dichotomy, though. Mixed farming with crop rotation can be done sustainably with meat and dairy added into the mix, while some land is not suited to much other than sheep farming - hill farms in Wales for instance, so the choice there isn't 'meat or veg'; it is 'meat or nothing'. Lapps have little option other than to eat reindeer if their way of life is to be sustainable.

Which are the most important questions here? For me, the most pressing concern is the unsustainable nature of most monoculture, whether that is done for animal feed or to feed humans. We absolutely need to move away from factory-farmed animals, but move away from that towards what? Insisting on only a simplistic vegan or bust isn't really helpful in that debate.
Click to expand...


You've put it better than I could..
 
littlebabyjesus said:
It is a simplistic dichotomy, though. Mixed farming with crop rotation can be done sustainably with meat and dairy added into the mix, while some land is not suited to much other than sheep farming - hill farms in Wales for instance, so the choice there isn't 'meat or veg'; it is 'meat or nothing'. Lapps have little option other than to eat reindeer if their way of life is to be sustainable.

Which are the most important questions here? For me, the most pressing concern is the unsustainable nature of most monoculture, whether that is done for animal feed or to feed humans. We absolutely need to move away from factory-farmed animals, but move away from that towards what? Insisting on only a simplistic vegan or bust isn't really helpful in that debate.
Click to expand...
Not sure anyone has been arguing for 'vegan or bust'. But I'll argue that meat and dairy consumption HAS to come down for the sake of the planet's future. And that's not my opinion - it's something that is backed by hard science and research.
 
Plus, if lots of people go vegan, the people they might influence might not necessarily go full vegan, but they might start considering their meat consumption and moderating it. it's good just to have the numbers going up to make it a more acceptable idea to lessen one's consumption, if not to go fully vegan.
 
Lupa said:
Please stop being ignorant.
The Irish starved because the ONLY crop they were allowed grow for themselves were potatoes. They worked for landlords(British)..and the produce grown on landlords land was taken and sent to england.

Their own paltry potato crops grown by themselves failed due to blight.
Twice. Result...was that Irish people died. 1.5 million.
Click to expand...
Sorry, you're not making any sense. The famine wasn't a result of an absolute shortage of food produced by Irish farmers. Rather it was caused by political choices made by their British rulers. I can explain this, but I can't understand it for you.
 
littlebabyjesus said:
It is a simplistic dichotomy, though. Mixed farming with crop rotation can be done sustainably with meat and dairy added into the mix, while some land is not suited to much other than sheep farming - hill farms in Wales for instance, so the choice there isn't 'meat or veg'; it is 'meat or nothing'. Lapps have little option other than to eat reindeer if their way of life is to be sustainable.

Which are the most important questions here? For me, the most pressing concern is the unsustainable nature of most monoculture, whether that is done for animal feed or to feed humans. We absolutely need to move away from factory-farmed animals, but move away from that towards what? Insisting on only a simplistic vegan or bust isn't really helpful in that debate.
Click to expand...
Sami people can and do fish and hunt seals etc.
 
editor said:
Because I'm interested to learn how many people would still have to eat meat and why if 100% veganism became a practical option.
Click to expand...

Very hard to say with the current data - vegans are a self-selecting group and those who revert to omni or veggie will do so for a variety of reasons, and even among those who quote health reasons there may have been adjustments which would have rectified things.

There are probably about 10 things that are hard or impossible to get from a fully vegan diet, and most are easily supplemented.
 
Orang Utan said:
not sure what point you're trying to make. i didn't say 'we' were. I said that it is impossible for some to be 100% vegan currently.
Click to expand...

And I’m saying that this is of questionable relevance to this particular discussion seeing how huge reductions in meat and dairy consumption can go a very long way without affecting any of these people.
 
8ball said:
And I’m saying that this is of questionable relevance to this particular discussion seeing how huge reductions in meat and dairy consumption can go a very long way without affecting any of these people.
Click to expand...
nope. i've read it twice now, but don't understand what you are saying. i'm not even sure if we disagree!
 
Orang Utan said:
nope. i've read it twice now, but don't understand what you are saying. i'm not even sure if we disagree!
Click to expand...

I’m in agreement with your point above that reducing consumption of certain problems has become environmentally urgent.

I don’t agree that those people who don’t manage well on 100% vegan diets are relevant to this debate.
 
xenon said:
My point is just: If someone's trying to have less of an environmental impact through their consumer choices in some areas and if they're not hectoring others about doing the same, it's ridiculous and counterproductive to snear about them still having a smart phone or whatever.
Click to expand...
Except that isn't the case, is it. There are vegangelists on this thread whose whole life seems to revolve around spouting shite about how much of a better person they are than the meat eaters, solely because they don't eat meat.
 
TruXta said:
Sorry, you're not making any sense. The famine wasn't a result of an absolute shortage of food produced by Irish farmers. Rather it was caused by political choices made by their British rulers. I can explain this, but I can't understand it for you.
Click to expand...

My point....is that the only available food for many Irish people was a plant based option. Potatoes..
The exported food was predominantly meat and meat based. Horses, pigs, cattle, lard, rabbit, oysters, poultry. So do you understand now where I am coming from? The Irish would not have died if that food had been there for them.
The other products exported were whisky, potatoes and grain.
My point all along is that to deny people access to meat and force plant based farming and ultimately a plant based diet in a small country is not wise.
You keep saying there was enough to feed the country. Yes. I know. It never was available to the Irish. And it was meat based mainly ....not veg....
See below

"At the end of 1845, exports of potatoes from Ireland increased, especially to England, Belgium and Holland, all of which had experienced the potato blight. The reduction of potatoes in the Irish markets caused some concern within Ireland, although overseas demand for Irish potatoes diminished when some of them arrived at their ports of destination diseased with blight. The export of livestock to Britain (with the exception of pigs) also increased during the Famine. Whilst the export of pigs decreased, the export of bacon and ham increased from 930 cwt. in 1846 to 1,061 cwt. in 1847. In total over three million live animals were exported between 1846-50, more than the number of people who emigrated during the Famine years. In 1847, 9,992 calves were exported from Ireland to Britain, which represented a thirty-three per cent increase on exports on the previous year. Some of these cattle were then re-exported to Europe. Overall, during the Famine years, food exports to Europe from Britain increased. Irish food exports, however, went much further afield than Britain or even Europe. In the summer of 1847, a New York newspaper noted that imports of grain from Ireland were even larger than usual.
A wide variety of other foodstuffs left Ireland apart from livestock—vegetables and pulses (particularly peas, beans and onions), dairy products, fish (especially salmon, oysters and herrings) and even rabbits. In February 1847, 377 boxes of ‘fish and eggs’ and 383 boxes of fish were imported into Bristol alone. The butter export trade was particularly buoyant. In the first week of 1847, for example, 4,455 firkins of butter (a firkin equals nine gallons) were exported from Ireland to Liverpool. In the following week, this had risen to 4,691 firkins. Large quantities of butter were exported from Cork to all parts of Britain. For example, in the first nine months of 1847, 56,557 firkins of butter were exported to Bristol and 34,852 firkins to Liverpool. During the same period, 3,435 poultry were exported to Liverpool and 2,375 to Bristol.
Alcohol was also a major item of export. Although the foundation of Father Mathew’s temperance movement in 1838 had damaged the Irish alcoholic drink industry, it remained an important sector of the economy both for internal and external consumption. In 1847, six million gallons of grain spirit were consumed within Ireland. Exports were also high, mostly in the form of ale, stout, porter, and whiskey. These products were derived from grain (barley and malt or, to a limited extent, potatoes) and thus represented a disguised export of grain. In the first nine months of 1847, for example, 874,170 gallons of porter were exported from Ireland to Liverpool. During the same period, 278,658 gallons of Guinness were imported into Bristol. Whiskey exports were also substantial and 183,392 gallons of this spirit arrived in Liverpool. This aspect of the export trade was criticised within Ireland. The prohibition of distillation during a subsistence crisis was a traditional response by governments. In both 1845 and 1846, there were calls for distillation to be outlawed. This included requests from the corporation of Dublin and the Lord Lieutenant, Lord Heytesbury. These entreaties were refused.
In spite of the apparent commitment of both Peel and Russell’s governments to free trade, imports and exports continued to be hampered by the Navigation Acts, which restricted the ability of foreign ships to carry goods to ports in the United Kingdom. At the same time, freight charges were imposed on goods imported into the United Kingdom. These charges were highly volatile and, after the disastrous harvest of 1846, rose to three times their usual rate. This body of legislation and the continuation of freight charges hindered the free movement of goods into Ireland, especially during the critical months in the winter of 1846-47. This was recognised by Isaac Butt, former Professor of Political Economy at Trinity College. In 1847, he identified the paradox of expecting free trade to supply the Irish market whilst trade continued to be hampered by various restrictions. This led him to pose the rhetorical question:

If ministers resolved to trust the lives of the Irish people to private enterprise, was it not common sense and common justice to them that private enterprise should be unencumbered by any restrictions in the execution of the task of supplying, at the notice of a few months, provisions to five million people.

Soup Kitchens

By January 1847 it was obvious that the relief policies introduced by the Whig administration only a few months earlier had failed. In an attempt to ameliorate the situation, the government announced that the public works were to be replaced by soup kitchens. Furthermore, the Navigation Acts and all duties on foreign grain were temporarily suspended. These measures undoubtedly facilitated imports into Ireland in the spring and summer of 1847, when grain imports began to rise sharply and food prices to fall. This legislation coincided with the closing of the public works programme and their replacement with government soup kitchens, which were highly successful. However, these measures were too late to help the hundreds of thousands of people who had died in the preceding winter months when there had been a clear starvation gap for the destitute of Ireland. During these months, deprivation and starvation co-existed with a thriving export trade and high profit margins, demonstrating the duality of the Irish economy.
The second failure of the potato crop in 1846 left many people without access to their usual supply of food. The Whig government’s decision not to intervene in the market place but to use public works as the main means of providing relief was disastrous. In many instances, the wages paid on the relief works proved to be too low to purchase food in a period of ‘famine’ prices, forestalling and hoarding. At the same time, large amounts of food continued to leave Ireland and it was not until the following spring that food imports became substantial. Consequently, during the winter, there was a ‘starvation gap’. The size of that gap is best measured, not in calorific values or in terms of the volume of food exported, but in the amount of excess mortality and suffering during those months. Whilst official mortality statistics were not kept, the local Irish constabulary provided an unofficial estimate that 400,000 people had died due to a lack of food in the winter of 1846-47.
The belief that the British government had abandoned the Irish destitute to market forces was not confined to nationalists such as John Mitchel. The Earl of Clarendon, who had succeeded Bessborough as Lord Lieutenant, confided to the Prime Minister at the end of 1847 that:

No-one could now venture to dispute the fact that Ireland had been sacrificed to the London corn-dealers because you were a member for the City, and that no distress would have occurred if the exportation of Irish grain had been prohibited."

Food Exports from Ireland 1846-47


Now stop being a condescending little tit
 
Lupa said:
My point....is that the only available food for many Irish people was a plant based option. Potatoes..
The exported food was predominantly meat and meat based. Horses, pigs, cattle, lard, rabbit, oysters, poultry. So do you understand now where I am coming from? The Irish would not have died if that food had been there for them.
The other products exported were whisky, potatoes and grain.
My point all along is that to deny people access to meat and force plant based farming and ultimately a plant based diet in a small country is not wise.
You keep saying there was enough to feed the country. Yes. I know. It never was available to the Irish. And it was meat based mainly ....not veg....
See below

"At the end of 1845, exports of potatoes from Ireland increased, especially to England, Belgium and Holland, all of which had experienced the potato blight. The reduction of potatoes in the Irish markets caused some concern within Ireland, although overseas demand for Irish potatoes diminished when some of them arrived at their ports of destination diseased with blight. The export of livestock to Britain (with the exception of pigs) also increased during the Famine. Whilst the export of pigs decreased, the export of bacon and ham increased from 930 cwt. in 1846 to 1,061 cwt. in 1847. In total over three million live animals were exported between 1846-50, more than the number of people who emigrated during the Famine years. In 1847, 9,992 calves were exported from Ireland to Britain, which represented a thirty-three per cent increase on exports on the previous year. Some of these cattle were then re-exported to Europe. Overall, during the Famine years, food exports to Europe from Britain increased. Irish food exports, however, went much further afield than Britain or even Europe. In the summer of 1847, a New York newspaper noted that imports of grain from Ireland were even larger than usual.
A wide variety of other foodstuffs left Ireland apart from livestock—vegetables and pulses (particularly peas, beans and onions), dairy products, fish (especially salmon, oysters and herrings) and even rabbits. In February 1847, 377 boxes of ‘fish and eggs’ and 383 boxes of fish were imported into Bristol alone. The butter export trade was particularly buoyant. In the first week of 1847, for example, 4,455 firkins of butter (a firkin equals nine gallons) were exported from Ireland to Liverpool. In the following week, this had risen to 4,691 firkins. Large quantities of butter were exported from Cork to all parts of Britain. For example, in the first nine months of 1847, 56,557 firkins of butter were exported to Bristol and 34,852 firkins to Liverpool. During the same period, 3,435 poultry were exported to Liverpool and 2,375 to Bristol.
Alcohol was also a major item of export. Although the foundation of Father Mathew’s temperance movement in 1838 had damaged the Irish alcoholic drink industry, it remained an important sector of the economy both for internal and external consumption. In 1847, six million gallons of grain spirit were consumed within Ireland. Exports were also high, mostly in the form of ale, stout, porter, and whiskey. These products were derived from grain (barley and malt or, to a limited extent, potatoes) and thus represented a disguised export of grain. In the first nine months of 1847, for example, 874,170 gallons of porter were exported from Ireland to Liverpool. During the same period, 278,658 gallons of Guinness were imported into Bristol. Whiskey exports were also substantial and 183,392 gallons of this spirit arrived in Liverpool. This aspect of the export trade was criticised within Ireland. The prohibition of distillation during a subsistence crisis was a traditional response by governments. In both 1845 and 1846, there were calls for distillation to be outlawed. This included requests from the corporation of Dublin and the Lord Lieutenant, Lord Heytesbury. These entreaties were refused.
In spite of the apparent commitment of both Peel and Russell’s governments to free trade, imports and exports continued to be hampered by the Navigation Acts, which restricted the ability of foreign ships to carry goods to ports in the United Kingdom. At the same time, freight charges were imposed on goods imported into the United Kingdom. These charges were highly volatile and, after the disastrous harvest of 1846, rose to three times their usual rate. This body of legislation and the continuation of freight charges hindered the free movement of goods into Ireland, especially during the critical months in the winter of 1846-47. This was recognised by Isaac Butt, former Professor of Political Economy at Trinity College. In 1847, he identified the paradox of expecting free trade to supply the Irish market whilst trade continued to be hampered by various restrictions. This led him to pose the rhetorical question:

If ministers resolved to trust the lives of the Irish people to private enterprise, was it not common sense and common justice to them that private enterprise should be unencumbered by any restrictions in the execution of the task of supplying, at the notice of a few months, provisions to five million people.

Soup Kitchens

By January 1847 it was obvious that the relief policies introduced by the Whig administration only a few months earlier had failed. In an attempt to ameliorate the situation, the government announced that the public works were to be replaced by soup kitchens. Furthermore, the Navigation Acts and all duties on foreign grain were temporarily suspended. These measures undoubtedly facilitated imports into Ireland in the spring and summer of 1847, when grain imports began to rise sharply and food prices to fall. This legislation coincided with the closing of the public works programme and their replacement with government soup kitchens, which were highly successful. However, these measures were too late to help the hundreds of thousands of people who had died in the preceding winter months when there had been a clear starvation gap for the destitute of Ireland. During these months, deprivation and starvation co-existed with a thriving export trade and high profit margins, demonstrating the duality of the Irish economy.
The second failure of the potato crop in 1846 left many people without access to their usual supply of food. The Whig government’s decision not to intervene in the market place but to use public works as the main means of providing relief was disastrous. In many instances, the wages paid on the relief works proved to be too low to purchase food in a period of ‘famine’ prices, forestalling and hoarding. At the same time, large amounts of food continued to leave Ireland and it was not until the following spring that food imports became substantial. Consequently, during the winter, there was a ‘starvation gap’. The size of that gap is best measured, not in calorific values or in terms of the volume of food exported, but in the amount of excess mortality and suffering during those months. Whilst official mortality statistics were not kept, the local Irish constabulary provided an unofficial estimate that 400,000 people had died due to a lack of food in the winter of 1846-47.
The belief that the British government had abandoned the Irish destitute to market forces was not confined to nationalists such as John Mitchel. The Earl of Clarendon, who had succeeded Bessborough as Lord Lieutenant, confided to the Prime Minister at the end of 1847 that:

No-one could now venture to dispute the fact that Ireland had been sacrificed to the London corn-dealers because you were a member for the City, and that no distress would have occurred if the exportation of Irish grain had been prohibited."

Food Exports from Ireland 1846-47


Now stop being a condescending little tit
Click to expand...
All you're doing is making my point for me, and being an arrogant twat at the same time.
 
TruXta said:
All you're doing is making my point for me, and being an arrogant twat at the same time.
Click to expand...

I don't believe I'm making your point at all.
My point is that a country needs to have meat dairy and plant based food to be self sufficient. And that to eliminate meat and dairy will cause problems.
I think the Irish famine proves my point very well.
 
Lupa said:
I don't believe I'm making your point at all.
My point is that a country needs to have meat dairy and plant based food to be self sufficient. And that to eliminate meat and dairy will cause problems.
I think the Irish famine proves my point very well.
Click to expand...
I give up. I have to say you're coming across as more than a little stupid right now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

N
The best fried rice
Replies
25
Views
615
Epona
Epona
Infidel Castro
Found a very good rice for ye olde rice maker
Replies
0
Views
374
Infidel Castro
Infidel Castro
S
Overnight Oats
4 5 6 7 8
Replies
231
Views
7K
izz
izz
danny la rouge
Will I die? (Rice edition #2341)
2 3
Replies
69
Views
2K
Sue
S
NoXion
What the hell is this light fitting called, and how easy would it be to get a new one?
Replies
5
Views
324
spitfire
spitfire
Back
Top Bottom