A vegan world would be wasting food that could be used to feed more people

[Third Person Groove]

Hey guys, iv recently came across a argument I dont know how to answer. Theres a study that came out and it makes sense.

It basically claims for example that much of the farmers land ; in the US for example, is grass land mostly for "food" animals. If we all went vegan in america we would potentially be losing large amounts of potential food because these lands are not supportive to most crops besides grass.


Im very unexperienced in all of this and I know little and I just dont know how to respond to this..

I know much of the worlds grains and crops are fed to livestock already. Although what about the farmers, what about all of these grass lands? Whats a good answer to this argument?

[carnap]

Grain crops are grass crops and we can eat grains. Also most land that can grow grasses can also grow legumes. If you converted all the crop land used to grow grasses/grains/legumes for animals for human needs you'd only need a fraction of the land. Even in chickens, which are the most efficient animal to raise, you still lose around 70% of the food energy/protein you put into the system.

With that said, if everyone went vegan you would lose food. That is because you can feed animals crop byproducts or pasture them on lands that you cannot raise crops on.

[brimstoneSalad]

With that said, if everyone went vegan you would lose food. That is because you can feed animals crop byproducts

Not that much food, and that's assuming you really just throw it out or compost it.

You can also grow edible mushrooms on crop byproducts, or otherwise use them to create single cell protein at greater efficiency than conversion to meat.
For mushrooms the efficiency is only a little higher than dairy IIRC, but there's still a food savings there.

Of course (and I think you agree with this) even if we did not do that, the food we would save by converting *most* land into human food and not using it on animals would be much much larger than the food we'd be wasting from those byproducts if we just composted them or something.

So:

(best case) Everybody going vegan & eating mushrooms grown on on crop byproducts > almost everybody going vegan and a small number of people (or even just our cats) eating small amounts of animal products produced exclusively from those crop byproducts > everybody going vegan and just composting those byproducts > nobody going vegan (worst case)

[Third Person Groove]

Thank you once again.

[carnap]

You can also grow edible mushrooms on crop byproducts, or otherwise use them to create single cell protein at greater efficiency than conversion to meat.

I'm not aware of any existing large-scale method that would allow you to convert plant byproducts into food in a way that would be efficient. The most efficient large-scale methods would be to raise various insects. Also there is the issue of pasture lands, these lands cannot readily grow crops but can be used to raise animals.

[brimstoneSalad]

I'm not aware of any existing large-scale method that would allow you to convert plant byproducts into food in a way that would be efficient.

You aren't aware of commercial mycoculture? It's pretty wide spread in Asia.

The most efficient large-scale methods would be to raise various insects.

It's possible that insects are more efficient than fungus; in the thread we examined it, we didn't compare insect FCR to mushroom production.
If it beats dairy, then it's possible.

Also there is the issue of pasture lands, these lands cannot readily grow crops but can be used to raise animals.

It's not an issue because we don't need those lands; we already produce plenty of food.

But if you're trying to maximize food production for some reason and you refuse to plant or irrigate those lands, you could always send a lawn-mower out there to collect grass which could be used to grow mushrooms.
There's no reason to believe grazing animals are the only way to harvest the nutrients in grasses, even if you refuse to plant anything different on these lands. Doesn't make sense not to plant them, though, there are plenty of crops that do well in arid areas.

There are some areas that are all rocks and lichens where only goats can practically access them and it wouldn't be worth reforming the land, but these yield poorly anyway; it's not like you're leaving a significant resource on the table by not utilizing them. If we had to, we could build up soil, move rocks, irrigate, and create access roads to make more efficient use of them.

[carnap]

You aren't aware of commercial mycoculture? It's pretty wide spread in Asia.

It is but its not an efficient way to convert the energy in plant byproducts into food which is, in part, why mushrooms are so expensive. Mushroom farms require other inputs as well where as ruminants can subsist entirely on plant-byproducts.

It's not an issue because we don't need those lands; we already produce plenty of food.

The issue here is sustainable production. We produce plenty of food but only because we are exploiting the environment in ways that cannot be sustained. There is an obvious plant + animal model for sustainable production but nobody has shown how a large-scale plant only model would work.

There's no reason to believe grazing animals are the only way to harvest the nutrients in grasses, even if you refuse to plant anything different on these lands.

Harvesting would destroy the pasture lands, cattle don't kill the grasses they eat they only eat the top of the grass. And its not about refusing to plant anything else, its that you cannot efficiently plant crops on the land

[brimstoneSalad]

It is but its not an efficient way to convert the energy in plant byproducts into food which is, in part, why mushrooms are so expensive.

Feedstock for mushrooms is pretty cheap, I think you're confused about why mushrooms are expensive.

It has more to do with competing fungus (requiring special protocols and educated workers), the need for a climate controlled environment, and the skill needed to produce them. Mostly issues of labor and education, and a little infrastructure investment. Technology helps a lot there (thermostats, etc.), but economy of scale would do a lot too.

It's easy/lazy to let a cow go graze and then kill her when she's big enough. It takes more knowledge and skill to grow mushrooms. The price is coming down (with increasing quantity) in much of Asia. The Western market doesn't really have the know-how or demand to work at those scales yet though.

There is an obvious plant + animal model for sustainable production but nobody has shown how a large-scale plant only model would work.

There's nothing sustainable about that level of animal agriculture.
And there's no reason to believe that technologies used in other parts of the world, or those used at smaller scale like single cell protein production, can't fill the gap with farm wastes.

Animals are not magical sources of nitrogen. There's nothing to be skeptical of with green manure, crop rotation, etc. We even know how much land it takes to produce a certain amount of nitrogen.

Harvesting would destroy the pasture lands, cattle don't kill the grasses they eat they only eat the top of the grass.

How do you think a lawn mower works exactly?

And its not about refusing to plant anything else, its that you cannot efficiently plant crops on the land

We can't keep relying on animal agriculture either. Maybe we need to put in a little more effort to grow something else IF we want to use that land.
There's no good reason to keep using ruminants.