[slothtrop]

Lack of sustainability is contingent on increased encroachment of land and emissions, and that is contingent on growing demand overtaking gains in technological efficiency. The demand is growing as a matter of policy: immigration to prop up the GDP. Growing demand for just about anything will increase emissions, pollution and land encroachment - some just exacerbate things faster than others. That does not mean all other products are "sustainable".

The only "sustainability" is where demand does not outstrip the effects of innovation. No one is moving to North America to eschew animal products, vehicles, detached homes, gadgets and other conveniences. Living as we do is what makes it a better life. It's certainly not for the healthcare. Notwithstanding, the bulk of the global increase in demand is coming from East Asia as they lift themselves out of poverty.

In the short-run, marginal changes in consumer habits can have some effect (which matters if there is a sense of urgency for staving off carbon emissions), but in the long run it's a moot point. Seaweed infused feed makes methane a solved problem, and land-use for cattle has been decreasing in the U.S. (it's increased in South America, which exports to China).

This is why govts are rolling out "greener home" grants and the like, there's low-hanging fruit to help lower emissions quickly in effort to meet whatever target they currently have. They could also disincentivize purchasing SUVs, which should not matter that much to manufacturers as they sell the alternatives anyway. More than one way to lower a carbon footprint, some of which are more palatable to consumers. Broadly speaking they are unwilling and unlikely to switch to veganism.

[myshpa]

Few assumptions and oversimplifications, let's address them one by one:

> Lack of sustainability is contingent on increased encroachment of land and emissions, and that is contingent on growing demand overtaking gains in technological efficiency.

Sustainability is not solely dependent on one aspect but is the result of a combination of factors, including land use, resource management, environmental impacts, and ethical considerations. Even with improved technological efficiency, the sheer scale of demand for animal products still pose significant sustainability challenges.

> The demand is growing as a matter of policy: immigration to prop up the GDP.

The demand for animal products is influenced by various factors, including cultural preferences, dietary habits, advertising, and economic factors. While GDP growth and immigration can play a role in shaping demand, they are not the only drivers, and sustainability issues related to animal agriculture go beyond immigration policies.

> Growing demand for just about anything will increase emissions, pollution, and land encroachment - some just exacerbate things faster than others. That does not mean all other products are 'sustainable'

Some industries might indeed have more significant environmental impacts, and in the case of animal agriculture, the evidence points to its significant contribution to greenhouse gas emissions, deforestation, and water pollution and biodiversity loss.

You can't solve all of these with algae:

- Greenhouse gas emissions (methane, CO2, N2O)

- Deforestation (50% of pastures used to be forests)

- Land degradation

- Water pollution

- Water overconsumption

- Loss of biodiversity

- Antibiotic resistance

- Ocean dead zones

- Inefficient land and resource use

- Ethical concerns

- Contribution to zoonotic diseases

- Air pollution

- Eutrophication

- Soil erosion

- High energy consumption

- Chemical runoff from pesticides and fertilizers

- Destruction of habitats and ecosystems

- Inequality in global food distribution

- Public health risks from foodborne illnesses

- Nutrient pollution

- Strain on waste management systems

- Overfishing (40-70% of plankton gone, sharks 90% gone, fish almost gone in 2040's)

[slothtrop]

> not solely dependent on one aspect

That's why I mentioned more than one.

> Even with improved technological efficiency, the sheer scale of demand for animal products still pose significant sustainability challenges.

That is exactly what I said. Demand is outstripping rate of innovation.

> The demand for animal products is influenced by various factors, including cultural preferences

Most immigrants have that cultural preference, dietary habit, etc.

> advertising, and economic factors

Weakly for staple products, but consumers will spend less on meat when finances are tighter.

> While GDP growth and immigration can play a role in shaping demand, they are not the only drivers, and sustainability issues related to animal agriculture go beyond immigration policies.

It is overwhelmingly the strongest driver. It's not even close. So far the U.S. population has grown by 1,706,706 since 2022. What's more likely, that the growing demand for animal products is a cultural shift, or that there are more people demanding animal products?

Clearly the cultural shift among the middle class and affluent has been a) marginal increase in vegan and vegetarian identity, b) recent enthusiasm between both omnivores and vegans/vegetarians for plant-based products. Despite the latter, the actual vegan demographic does not budge much. If it did, demand for animal products would steadily fall - it does not. It grows. This is not because carnivore dieters are deciding to eat an extra steak to spite you.

> You can't solve all of these with algae:

Moot point if the demand is not growing faster than technological innovation.

Immigration and developing countries growing wealthier is inextricably linked to what you deem as unsustainable.