Hacker News Reader

Comment by randomdata | Hacker News Reader

> That's because we dedicate most of our water and land resources to feeding cattle that we then eat.

As a farmer, I'm struggling to picture how we could change that land utilization in a significant way without technology to enable it. It's not quite as simple as consumer desires, although you are right that changing consumer habits changes the flow of money and where it is invested which would also spur on the necessary technology, presumably.

View on HN

From someone who is not a farmer and doesn't know so much about this, for example could we grow vegetables and feed them to humans directly, rather than feeding grains to cattle?

I've been trying to feed vegetables to three small humans. Sometimes it works, but sometimes the humans seem to reject them and it fails.

That's probably a good idea, but it's worth noting that about 30% of the Earth's land surface is too dry for crops, but works fine for pasturing cattle.

I don't really think the issue with with grazing cattle on land that's suitable for it. I think the issue is that we're raising cattle in places that _arent_ suitable for it.

Take for instance the factory farms which have to constantly ship food in to feed the cattle. Another example is deforestation to create fields for cattle to graze.

I think the OP is right, we need to convince more people that beef is not a sustainable food with the rate at which we consume it today.

The problem is our taste for grain (and alfalfa) fed meats.

People probably wouldn't eat as much meat as they do now if it were from free range, non-grain fed animals.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com