[JoeNr76]

The article is wrong. I don't get how this could make it to the top.

It has nothing to do with greenhouse emissions, but with nitrogen compound emission. See https://www.dutchnews.nl/features/2022/06/whats-all-the-fuss... (the first english source I could find)

The source is mostly cattle. Which doesn't make up for Ukrainian grain.

[mastazi]

> The source is mostly cattle. Which doesn't make up for Ukrainian grain.

I would expect that the more food shortages become severe, the more different types of food become fungible.

You might think this happens only in extreme cases, but as a "poor" Uni student I don't remember eating expensive food very often. And I was living in one of the richest countries on earth.

Single parents, people in disadvantaged communities etc., even in first-world countries, have the problem of putting food on the plate, and they don't really have the luxury to think about what type of food that is.

[mywittyname]

Beef prices have been extremely high for a while now, having over doubled since the pandemic started, and going up 5x since 2010. The people suffering from food insecurity haven't been eating beef as a staple. It's a luxury.

Industrial beef is fed grains that could be instead used to feed humans (or, at least the land used to produce these grains can instead produce human food). This is a far more efficient use of calories. People worried about food insecurity should be looking at reducing meat production for this very reason.

[mastazi]

My argument is that if all beef in the world magically disappeared this minute due to an evil curse, food prices would go up across the board, regardless of food categories. I may be wrong.

> It's a luxury.

IMHO it's not a luxury in the same way that caviar and champagne are, it's a luxury in the same way that fresh greens are a luxury compared to frozen peas.

[mywittyname]

Momentarily, for sure.

Medium or long term though, practically all other domesticated animals are more efficient than beef on a per-calorie basis. Chickens in particular, are substantially more efficient. Best case, replacing beef with chicken could increase meat yields by 10x, worst case, by 3x.

https://awellfedworld.org/feed-ratios/

[mastazi]

> practically all other domesticated animals are more efficient than beef on a per-calorie basis

yes, this is true, although some of those, like chickens which you mentioned, or pigs that are mentioned in the link you shared, are dependent on grains - unlike beef, which can be grass-fed.

But there are more animals besides beef that can be grass-fed, and they might be more efficient than beef.

It would be interesting to know the feed conversion ratios of goats and sheep for example.

The problem of goats and sheep is that, in a regenerative faming context, their manure is not perceived to be as effective as cow manure.

For this reason, would be interesting to measure both feed conversion ratios AND manure production ratio.

Knowing the effectiveness of manure in a regenerative farming context is very important, unless we want to continue depending on fertilisers made from petroleum which is just as bad as burning gasoline in terms of global warming.

[swader999]

Most ranchland is ill-suited to other uses.

[swader999]

Many are wondering if this is by design. Generate a crisis and then solve the problem with an approach that gives you what you want. Force the little people to eat bugs and only fly on planes rarely. Tie your wallet and passport to what you buy, where you go etc and fence them in.

[rocqua]

I think the source is dairy farming specifically. So cattle yes, but kept for milk rather than for beef?

[prox]

So if these farmers would switch to agriculture it would be a solution right? Although fertilizers come with their own set of problems if I remember correctly.

[baobob]

How does a car compare to a cow?

[elsjaako]

About 45% of these emissions come from farms, 12% from cars. The national speed limit was lowered from 130 to 100 km/hr to deal with this issue (happened a few years ago)

[swader999]

Plants turn CO2 into proteins and sugars. One of two things happens. Either the cattle eat the plants and process them or the plants rot and produce CO2 and Methane which quickly becomes CO2.

Animals eat the plant some of the CO2 is stored as fat and protein. The remainder is exuded in the form of cowshit and farts. The cowshit goes back to the soil and into plants. The Methane produced quickly becomes CO2 which is, AGAIN, used by the plants to produce plant growth. How is a single atom of carbon actually created in any of this? Sure ,if animal numbers suddenly expand rapidly, you get a very very minute increase in Methane levels. The effect is indiscernible in reality.