University bans all beef from campus...........

[coffeebreath]

In my honest opinion - chicken, pork and lamb is tastier anyway, cows are only needed for delicious butter, beef products should have more of a luxury tag price on them.

A cow needs to graze, or stand in a cage and be fed grain, but the cereal/grain feed needs to be grown and transported. I don't think it's "vegan science" to see that relying so much on beef products is simply not sustainable for the entire world population. Forget methane and think more about the exponential size of land required to feed one cow in order to feed one human.

[Pesty]

Ahh you prefer chicken so fk the rest of us.

Got it.

Nation of boot lickers, quislings and good little NPCs you see a few hippies in the street some little girl pushed in you at every opportunity on the BBC and you’ve learned by rote to chant ban beef.

Meanwhile all the stars and rich media moguls whom push this st on you and fund these protest are laughing.

[Leithen]

coffeebreath said:

Forget methane and think more about the exponential size of land required to feed one cow in order to feed one human.

You might be surprised how much meat comes
From one cow and how many humans can be fed from it. Especially as part of a balanced diet which is what the recent report is recommending.

Then factor in that the majority of farmland in the UK is best suited for grazing, and it quickly becomes obvious that extensive conversion of grass into meat is the most efficient way to produce food, at least in this country.

[csd19]

Mothersruin said:

Mr Whippy said:

biggbn said:

So what's your solution? We stop eating non meat and concentrate on meat? Are all the experts simultaneously wrong? I am genuinely interested as I like to see both sides of arguments and I know we are all guilty of confirmation bias to an extent

Edited by biggbn on Tuesday 13th August 12:53

All the lamb I see eats grass and drinks from streams, then pisses on the very same land from whence the water came.

They eat the grass which absorbs the co2 as it grows.

From what I can see, lamb is pretty carbon and water neutral.

Yes it’ll ‘use’ water, but then it pisses it out.
What other mechanism can it use to destroy water forever?
What other way can it detriment the water in the natural environment if sustainably farmed?

Carbon. We can grow trees and burn them, it’s carbon neutral.

We can grow grass to feed to lambs to then eat. Carbon neutral.


And if hill farmers didn’t farm lamb? Well they farm sheep because it’s hilly and unsuitable for arable purposes.

So what do you do? Have millions of hectares full of rabbits, all eating grass and taking in water, all to the same levels the sheep or cattle did before.

Something fills the gap in the biosphere.

Unless you propose to kill all mammals that dare to exist, to ‘save’ the planet.


I’m all for people eating less meat overall, but eating more sustainable, quality, high welfare meat.

We’ve got too used to treating animals like crap in high intensity farming and making meat cheap.
That’s what the problem is.


Fundamentally meat’s/animals environmental credentials are top notch.
They existed on this planet long before humans and ‘agriculture’


The problems on environment are unsustainable farming practices, which are just as damaging be it meat or plant.

My solution would be population control.

Just need the world to get past the elephant in the room and discuss how that's going to happen.

Yer but wot about their 'ooooman rights?!

Totally with you on the population control btw much more relevant to "saving the planet" than not having a steak now and again. Maybe we should just eat the excess children?

[coffeebreath]

Leithen said:

You might be surprised how much meat comes
From one cow and how many humans can be fed from it. Especially as part of a balanced diet which is what the recent report is recommending.

Then factor in that the majority of farmland in the UK is best suited for grazing, and it quickly becomes obvious that extensive conversion of grass into meat is the most efficient way to produce food, at least in this country.

Yes, at least in this country. Most cattle in the global food trade are not grazing animals though, they are fed a cheap cereal diet which has to be grown. There isn't enough suitable land to graze the global cattle population on grass without destroying the ecology of said land.

Pesty said:

Ahh you prefer chicken so fk the rest of us.

Yes, actually, it really is the rest of you that are the problem. Flatten a few countries and feed the population to my chicken army. Job done.

[funkyrobot]

KrazyIvan said:

What about beef curtains?

I thought exactly the same, but am far too late.

[grumbledoak]

coffeebreath said:

Yes, at least in this country. Most cattle in the global food trade are not grazing animals though, they are fed a cheap cereal diet which has to be grown. There isn't enough suitable land to graze the global cattle population on grass without destroying the ecology of said land.

How do you work this last bit out? It is arable crops that are turning our soil to dust, even with petrochemical fertilizer. Beef on pasture is infinitely sustainable.

Anyone wondering why we have a big push to ban beef now just needs to Google "Impossible Burger" and "Beyond Burger", have a look at the ingredients and the price, and see if you can work out the profit margins.

[RTB]

Mothersruin said:

My solution would be population control.

Just need the world to get past the elephant in the room and discuss how that's going to happen.

Ironically it seems that the best form of population control is to have a well educated, healthy population with a good standard of living. If we can make a good standard of living more sustainable, then the population issue will probably look after itself.

[Evanivitch]

grumbledoak said:

How do you work this last bit out? It is arable crops that are turning our soil to dust, even with petrochemical fertilizer. Beef on pasture is infinitely sustainable.
.

Except Beef isn't raised in pasture. They spend atleast a third of the year in sheds. They're fed a multitude of supplements. Even the pasture they are fed on is heavily managed to ensure maximum productivity. The idea that it's "just grass" is lies by the industry.

[The Mad Monk]

TL:DR

The Boss Lady said, inter alia:-

"It is part of a new drive by the university to become carbon neutral by 2025, which involves building more solar panels and switching to a “clean” energy supplier".

How can they be sure that the electricity coming down the wires hasn't been generated by a nasty, smelly, coal-fired power station?

[CambsBill]

matrignano said:

I popped to Tesco at lunch and was quite shocked that their apples mostly came from South Africa and... freaking New Zealand!!!
£2 for a bunch of apples that were literally flown in from the other side of the planet.
Madness

Just to put your mind to rest, there's no way that fruit will have been airfreighted - the costings just don't work. Seafreight (using bunker fuel mind, one of the dirtiest going) is the way for virtually all fruit & veg transported over long distances.

English apples are probably a week or so away from harvest still, so S Hemisphere will be the only fresh stuff available at the moment

HTH

[CambsBill]

Pothole said:

Completely stupid when they are still selling bottled water, 10p levy or not.

Yes, looks like they want to profit themselves from the sale of single-use plastics. Hypocrisy?

Why not put their money where their mouths are and install a few chilled (mains) water dispensers, like you'll find in Borough Market as one example?

[turbobloke]

CambsBill said:

Pothole said:

Completely stupid when they are still selling bottled water, 10p levy or not.

Yes, looks like they want to profit themselves from the sale of single-use plastics. Hypocrisy?

Why not put their money where their mouths are and install a few chilled (mains) water dispensers, like you'll find in Borough Market as one example?

Good question, the answer to apparent conundrums of that nature emerged way back when one of the same types said this about planting trees.

Kyoto Delegate on 05 December 1997 said:

The trouble with this idea is that planting trees will not lead to the societal changes we want to achieve

[The Mad Monk]

CambsBill said:

Just to put your mind to rest, there's no way that fruit will have been airfreighted - the costings just don't work. Seafreight (using bunker fuel mind, one of the dirtiest going) is the way for virtually all fruit & veg transported over long distances.

English apples are probably a week or so away from harvest still, so S Hemisphere will be the only fresh stuff available at the moment

HTH

Does this mean that when Brexit finally arrives, there will be times of the year when we won't have certain fruit in this country?

[Camoradi]

turbobloke said:

Good question, the answer to apparent conundrums of that nature emerged way back when one of the same types said this about planting trees.

Kyoto Delegate on 05 December 1997 said:

The trouble with this idea is that planting trees will not lead to the societal changes we want to achieve

The real intention ........control of the masses

[Camoradi]

The Mad Monk said:

Does this mean that when Brexit finally arrives, there will be times of the year when we won't have certain fruit in this country?

I doubt it. The rest of the EU are in the same hemisphere as we are......So if we don't have something in season it's unlikely they do

[CambsBill]

The Mad Monk said:

CambsBill said:

Just to put your mind to rest, there's no way that fruit will have been airfreighted - the costings just don't work. Seafreight (using bunker fuel mind, one of the dirtiest going) is the way for virtually all fruit & veg transported over long distances.

English apples are probably a week or so away from harvest still, so S Hemisphere will be the only fresh stuff available at the moment

HTH

Does this mean that when Brexit finally arrives, there will be times of the year when we won't have certain fruit in this country?

Who knows? Stuff like winter strawberries from Spain might get sold elsewhere if the growers think it'll get delayed & rot in the trucks.

On the other hand, the EU whacks a high tariff on Southern Hemisphere citrus in September to protect the EU growers, so the UK may well get cheaper fruit at that time of year because we'll have a new option to play off against the Italians & Spanish.

[Digga]

Mothersruin said:

bodhi said:

Zirconia said:

I thought beef was one of your five a day?

Not sure about beef - bacon definitely is.

And cheese.

Mayonnaise is a superfood.

Hey, joking aside, black pudding really is. I can't believe my luck.

[Mr Whippy]

Evanivitch said:

Breaking news, it doesn't.

Ever seen a farmer with a bag of feed on the back of his quad? Ever seen the sheep in the winter sheds?

Sheep farming, at present, is environmentally damaging because it's a race to the bottom on cost. Fleece is worth so little today that popular breeds now drop their fleece instead of requiring shearing. Government subsidies maintain the industry to a massive extent.

But the industry can adapt. Hardier breeds, better use of the land and lower density farming allow you to sell a premium product.

My family and many friends have farmed sheep all their lives.
Nothing super fancy here like special breeds or organic. Just bog standard farming on 100 - 2000 acre plots.

Low grass growth in winter requires feed. Mainly for pregnant sheep who need good nutrition.
Or perhaps as a supplement for lambs in a particularly bad grass growth spell... but that’s mostly an issue with over stocking really.

Sheds to support sheep with lambs if needed. The rest of the time, out in fields.

The rest is all just pasture and rainfall into streams for water supply.


And you forget what’d happen to all that grass pasture land on steep rainy hills if you didn’t put sheep on it.

You can plant crops anywhere near as efficiently if at all.
That’s exactly why it’s subsudised, because it’s intensive to farm and no one would if you didn’t.

So it’d be left to do what?

Grow rabbits, mice, rats, yadda yadda.

The biosphere ‘gap’ would be filled with an equal amount of decomposing grass, animals, etc.

• If* you’re farming sheep properly (imo), you’re essentially managing a natural resource that can live on that land, that would otherwise be full of sheep and other wildlife any way, as a good supply for humans.

It’s about as green as you can get.


Yes factory farming animals is bad. I never suggested it was good.


Irrespective of what you farm, all that matters is that it’s done sustainably.

Beef, lamb, chicken, etc, should all be on a near level with ‘natural baseline’ impact if it’s done right.


As noted, the only way to improve on nature wrt impact is to turn land that isn’t any use for arable land into ‘life free’ zones where all mammals are killed so they don’t dare exist and emit co2 and methane... those evil potential food sources that they are!


The argument against meat (sustainable) is an argument against non-human life being allowed to exist.


The entirety of Wales for example. If it’s not full of sheep, it’ll be full of wild deer, wild wolves, wild rabbits, wild sheep, wild goats, and everything in between.

What exactly do you think that is? Except an uncontrolled wild ‘food source’ for humans?

[Kawasicki]

Evanivitch said:

grumbledoak said:

How do you work this last bit out? It is arable crops that are turning our soil to dust, even with petrochemical fertilizer. Beef on pasture is infinitely sustainable.
.

Except Beef isn't raised in pasture. They spend atleast a third of the year in sheds. They're fed a multitude of supplements. Even the pasture they are fed on is heavily managed to ensure maximum productivity. The idea that it's "just grass" is lies by the industry.

I grew up in Ireland in the 80's and 90's. I helped my dad with farm work. The cattle ate grass. They were free to walk about in fields for most of the year and pretty well taken care of.