• shane@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    Okay, then you understood me. Buying local won’t save much CO₂.

    • TronBronson@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      Let’s compare 3 farms and please explain to me which one has the least amount of CO2 per pound of beef. You are incorrect and I shall demonstrate it, and I’d love to hear your theory on why you are correct given this context.

      Farm A: Natural farm, no fertilizer inputs, no feed inputs, rotating pastures, butchered on site, sold to a local market. Pastures have been historic farms and landscape consists of healthy native plants. Farm A uses a solar power and gets water from a local spring or aquifer.

      Farm B. A start up funded by the Brazilian government, gifted 100 acres of rainforest, burned it down and added grass seed and fertilizer. Purchased corn from a different South American country to finish the product. Had the beef shipped across the country for slaughter, had the beef shipped across the world for sale. The land is still surrounded by some rich forests, but the grazed part is severely depleted and bordering dead.

      Farm C. A feed lot in California. Cows are shipped in, water is shipped in, cows stand in dirt and erode the soil for most of their life. The land is barren and cannot take in any CO2. Cows are at a density of 100 head per acre. Standing shoulder by shoulder shitting. shit is transported out to local farms, cows are sold regionally and slaughtered locally.

      Which one of these models generates the least amount of CO2 emissions per pound of beef