A good (sustainable) life

MrHullMysterious

Well-Known Member
One more serious point, the type of meat you eat also has a big impact purely from and environmental pov (as well as how much of course).

Remember watching a program about it and basically, per kilogram of meat it takes approx following amount of food:

1kg Chicken : 2kg feed
1kg pork : 6kg feed
1kg beef : 20kg feed!

(Multiply by 2.2 for pounds)

I mainly eat fish and rare occasions chicken. (Don't know what the figure for fish is though), with extremely rarely a mixed grill.
 

soha

Well-Known Member
Chicken nowhere near as bad on this chart. (first seen this chart on Ida engbergs insta)
Has anyone tried veggie meat/burgers? Iv never tasted but I read that they are actually becoming more and more like the real thing texture/taste

Screenshot_20210130-085932_Chrome.jpg
 

MrHullMysterious

Well-Known Member
Chicken nowhere near as bad on this chart. (first seen this chart on Ida engbergs insta)
Has anyone tried veggie meat/burgers? Iv never tasted but I read that they are actually becoming more and more like the real thing texture/taste

View attachment 11409
I think in 5-10 years synthesized meats will become more mainstream as cheaper to produce commercially. Whether that be vat grown, or some sort of printed protein. Should reduce environmental pressure too. (Guess made from biomass of plants, bacteria or fungi🤔)

I've never tried veggie burgers but have friends who have and have mixed reviews, some good, some not so much.

Afaik you have to be careful what they contain as veggie not always means healthy. Especially if contain a lot of soy, as consuming a lot of soy based products can have impacts on health for men - although if that is a myth in reality please feel free to correct me!😁
 

Johnny Vodka

Well-Known Member
One more serious point, the type of meat you eat also has a big impact purely from and environmental pov (as well as how much of course).

Remember watching a program about it and basically, per kilogram of meat it takes approx following amount of food:

1kg Chicken : 2kg feed
1kg pork : 6kg feed
1kg beef : 20kg feed!

(Multiply by 2.2 for pounds)

I mainly eat fish and rare occasions chicken. (Don't know what the figure for fish is though), with extremely rarely a mixed grill.

I'll occasionally eat free range chicken and beef, but rarely pork now... The reason? Pigs are treated absolutely terribly in the factory farming system for such an intelligent animal. I probably would start eating pork again (occasionally) if I could find a more ethical source locally. Another thing to think about is food miles... It might actually be more ethical to get some calories from wild UK venison to tropical fruits flown halfway around the world. :lol:
 

CasaNegron

Active Member
I think in 5-10 years synthesized meats will become more mainstream as cheaper to produce commercially. Whether that be vat grown, or some sort of printed protein. Should reduce environmental pressure too. (Guess made from biomass of plants, bacteria or fungi🤔)

I've never tried veggie burgers but have friends who have and have mixed reviews, some good, some not so much.

Afaik you have to be careful what they contain as veggie not always means healthy. Especially if contain a lot of soy, as consuming a lot of soy based products can have impacts on health for men - although if that is a myth in reality please feel free to correct me!😁
I think there is a lot of hidden energy (carbon) costs in the industrial production of both these new "meats" and the classic veggie burgers.

I avoid soy too, for what it's worth. Started before I even heard about plant estrogens. It was puzzling me that there was a soy ingredient in 99% of the package foods I bought, including bread.
 

CasaNegron

Active Member
One solution ( there are multiple) would be a revival of the 'back to the land' movement of the 60s and 70s, aka hippie comunes. Years ago I binged on documentaries about the subject, trying to figure out why they failed.

From what I could infer it was too easy to leave. People would drift in and out, with a net loss over time. There was a broader society that was just easier and more convenient. Also, people wanted to be close to their relatives or coveted a traditional family structure that they grew up with.

A few places still exist but seem to have been taken over by single older men that assume more of an owner dynamic.

Maybe this might reappear as an option since the younger generation in more into sharing both partners and things. Particularly if the alternative is living in rolling lockdowns and eating 3d printed meat.
 

MrHullMysterious

Well-Known Member
One solution ( there are multiple) would be a revival of the 'back to the land' movement of the 60s and 70s, aka hippie comunes. Years ago I binged on documentaries about the subject, trying to figure out why they failed.

From what I could infer it was too easy to leave. People would drift in and out, with a net loss over time. There was a broader society that was just easier and more convenient. Also, people wanted to be close to their relatives or coveted a traditional family structure that they grew up with.

A few places still exist but seem to have been taken over by single older men that assume more of an owner dynamic.

Maybe this might reappear as an option since the younger generation in more into sharing both partners and things. Particularly if the alternative is living in rolling lockdowns and eating 3d printed meat.
I think that idyllic ideal isn't really feasible for 7+ billion people, hence why have high intensity agriculture. Unless we all live on the food poverty line, and have less people free to do other work. Although with more automation, we may find ourselves living that life anyhow!🤔

One possible route is to grow crops in the sea (eg seaweed/kelp) and use that as biomass in food production.

From what I remember, there isn't much farmable land left that isn't already (besides more slash and burn of the forests), so food production capacity is facing major problems along with changing weather patterns.

A capitalist would say the "market" will correct itself with supply and demand and all that, I personally think leaving it to that will be a unmitigated disaster.

There is no simple answer otherwise we'd have done it. Just difficult and painful ones that affect peoples every day lives, which is why you get pushback and no major progress. We tend only to make dramatic changes in a crisis. But that lack of forward planning will result in mass suffering.
  • Reducing meat consumption
  • Cutting out red meat consumption
  • Eating less if calorie intake is above what you need.
  • Less children (stable pop numbers)
  • Less driving
  • Less buying new stuff (new electric car vs old car when you do very few miles etc)
  • Less e waste - better recycling or repair of items.
  • Less "smart" lights, sockets and other appliances at home - they are all effectively in standby and drawing power always - old fashioned switch please 😂
  • Less flying
  • Less long distance shipping
So basically "less" which like said above is why people push back 😬
 

Johnny Vodka

Well-Known Member
I think that idyllic ideal isn't really feasible for 7+ billion people, hence why have high intensity agriculture. Unless we all live on the food poverty line, and have less people free to do other work. Although with more automation, we may find ourselves living that life anyhow!🤔
What about the idea of community allotments, a sort of milder version of the commune described above? TBH, a lot of 'other work' maybe isn't that important or even satisfying. If people did less of this other work, but contributed time and labour to a community allotment, they'd get a bit of exercise and some good quality (and organic as much possible, hopefully) fruit and veg.
 

CasaNegron

Active Member
I think that idyllic ideal isn't really feasible for 7+ billion people, hence why have high intensity agriculture. Unless we all live on the food poverty line, and have less people free to do other work. Although with more automation, we may find ourselves living that life anyhow!🤔

One possible route is to grow crops in the sea (eg seaweed/kelp) and use that as biomass in food production.

From what I remember, there isn't much farmable land left that isn't already (besides more slash and burn of the forests), so food production capacity is facing major problems along with changing weather patterns.

A capitalist would say the "market" will correct itself with supply and demand and all that, I personally think leaving it to that will be a unmitigated disaster.

There is no simple answer otherwise we'd have done it. Just difficult and painful ones that affect peoples every day lives, which is why you get pushback and no major progress. We tend only to make dramatic changes in a crisis. But that lack of forward planning will result in mass suffering.
  • Reducing meat consumption
  • Cutting out red meat consumption
  • Eating less if calorie intake is above what you need.
  • Less children (stable pop numbers)
  • Less driving
  • Less buying new stuff (new electric car vs old car when you do very few miles etc)
  • Less e waste - better recycling or repair of items.
  • Less "smart" lights, sockets and other appliances at home - they are all effectively in standby and drawing power always - old fashioned switch please 😂
  • Less flying
  • Less long distance shipping
So basically "less" which like said above is why people push back 😬
I agree with all of the above. My hypothesis is that we will end up at some level standard of living from 80-100 years ago, but it won't be by choice. Markets and supply shortages will demand that people adapt.
 

CasaNegron

Active Member
What about the idea of community allotments, a sort of milder version of the commune described above? TBH, a lot of 'other work' maybe isn't that important or even satisfying. If people did less of this other work, but contributed time and labour to a community allotment, they'd get a bit of exercise and some good quality (and organic as much possible, hopefully) fruit and veg.
If city/ town people work from home they will have more time for this... The issue is security and trust in a more densely populated environment. It seems we are wired for groups of 150 or less.
 
Last edited:

MrHullMysterious

Well-Known Member
What about the idea of community allotments, a sort of milder version of the commune described above? TBH, a lot of 'other work' maybe isn't that important or even satisfying. If people did less of this other work, but contributed time and labour to a community allotment, they'd get a bit of exercise and some good quality (and organic as much possible, hopefully) fruit and veg.
Yeah I can see that working to a degree, but if all 7 billion of us want to do that, is there actually enough land to so so without impacting industrial agriculture?

What I guess asking is so you mean returning to subsistence farming and not reliant on what we have today? If so that means 90% of your work day is tending the crops etc.

Might be fine for some, but for civilisation it would end up putting us in the dark ages. Farming where it got organised and produces a surplus freed up people to do other things and led to our advancements as a species. I'd like us to reach for the stars one day instead of been stuck in a field looking up at them and wondering what they are 😬

Of course if we end up with scifi equivalent of "universal providers" in a post scarcity civilisation, then pottering around on your allotment probably be kinda nice! (I suspect the top 1% is aiming for this but without the 99%)
 

MrHullMysterious

Well-Known Member
I think if we look at Zimbabwe, we can see how it would go if we did on a mass scale.
Industrial farming was run by white folks, they got kicked out and farms turned over to native black folks with no experience. They basically became substances farmers and the country couldn't feed themselves.

Side note, if we are talking about "the good life" style living, having people in close proximity to livestock dramatically increases risks of pandemic type events 🙈

Plus not sure I'd like to just live on turnips 😂. Animals are good at turning biomass we can't eat into energy dense food (protein). They are sort of walking bioreactors 😬
 

Snowy

Active Member
In large parts of Norway the only feasible use of farm land is to produce meat. This is because the climate is too harsh for crops, or the soil not suitable for potatoes. The only economically sensible use of land is to grow grass, which is then eaten by farm animals.

In many parts of the country farmers don't even have to pay to rent their neighbour's land. The supply of land is much higher than the demand. This means farmers often get to borrow farm land for free to grow grass. By using the land it doesn't get overgrown, and might have some value in the future.

Sheep usually graze in the forest.

I remember reading something similar about farm land in Russia. They are trying to attract former white farmers from Southern Africa to farm the land.

This means the whole cut out meat to save the earth argument doesn't make much sense in these parts of the world.
 
Top