Hacker News Reader

Comment by orthecreedence | Hacker News Reader

Parent comment has a point. If this production type replaces cement completely, then we'd need to know the delta in carbon emissions of the increased production of gelatin compared to the reduction of carbon emissions in cement to make a logical comparison.

You might be absolutely right that gelatin is "cheaper" than cement, but because prices don't incorporate externalities (carbon included) we can't use them for comparisons of this type.

View on HN

That's a fair point. However, stating the case for my argument, gelatin is a by-product and not necessarily a by-product of beef which is well-known for being a big contributor of C02 emissions, but other sources like chicken. From my understanding, anything that provides collagen can provide a basis for gelatin. To reach a well thought out conclusion dictates a full analysis, my gut feel is just that gelatin could provide a more environmentally beneficial solution.

Chicken produces health emergencies like bird flu.

Bird flu doesn't seem like an important environmental consequence which is what you two are discussing.

Not strictly environmental, no, but an economic externality nonetheless. I agree it's a stretch to use it in an argument about CO2 emissions, though.

The collective biological health of various species seems like an environmental concern to me. Economic externalities are a funny concept. Economists seem to use this term to obfuscate when their model fails to account for something unforeseen. In this case, various novel diseases seemed improbable. Until they weren't.

The way I see it, the concept of externalities is a way of systematically dismissing things as "relatively unimportant." The model is perfect, and describes a productive system beautifully, and anything unexpected that results from it is an "externality." Almost like a bug becoming a "feature" to someone who is unwilling to address the problems of a system they've constructed.

But that's what you get when your entire economy is based off of endless growth and profited market relations. I'm not an advocate of central planning for replacing markets, but definitely an advocate for production being about meeting needs instead of generating surplus value for private owners.

I agree with you about biological health being an environmental concern, by the way. But I'm willing to bet you and me might see things a bit differently from the regular crowd here. When most people think of the environment, they think of oceans, trees, rivers, air, etc.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com