{"items": [{"author": "Danner", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=112750332249982", "anchor": "fb-112750332249982", "service": "fb", "text": "Time to work with someone to make an infographic. Wall of text works for some, but not the people who quote the X lbs of corn stat.", "timestamp": "1363697382"}, {"author": "David German", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/111229345142780712481", "anchor": "gp-1363697774734", "service": "gp", "text": "Is the 86% of wheat that doesn't go into seitan useful for anything?", "timestamp": 1363697774}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/103013777355236494008", "anchor": "gp-1363698363670", "service": "gp", "text": "@David German\n\u00a0\"Is the 86% of wheat that doesn't go into seitan useful for anything?\"\n
\n
\nI don't think so. \u00a0Wikipedia says the rest of the wheat \"may be disposed of or used as stock for soups. In industrial production of gluten, the leftover starch may be disposed of via the municipal sewage systems. Makers of gluten in towns and cities are typically charged a fee to dispose of their starch into the local sewage system\".", "timestamp": 1363698363}, {"author": "Will", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=112800025578346", "anchor": "fb-112800025578346", "service": "fb", "text": "What's not calculated is the amount of water required to grow all that grain, much of it pumped from deep underground, from residual glacial water in the Ogallala aquifer. Once that water is gone it's gone, and water table levels continue to steadily drop as more and more is drained from it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ogallala_Aquifer", "timestamp": "1363699239"}, {"author": "Will", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=112808385577510", "anchor": "fb-112808385577510", "service": "fb", "text": "Once online source I just checked said it take 4,000-18,000 gallons of water to produce 1/3 pound of hamburger, depending on how the cattle are managed.", "timestamp": "1363700015"}, {"author": "Jan-Willem", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/100580955183019057735", "anchor": "gp-1363700016884", "service": "gp", "text": "Seems like starchy water would make a good animal feed. \u00a0I bet it's probably either too dilute or too prone to spoilage, though. \u00a0Sugar and/or starch solutions mold or ferment really fast unless you invest a lot of heat energy into preventing them from doing so.", "timestamp": 1363700016}, {"author": "Adam", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=112810892243926", "anchor": "fb-112810892243926", "service": "fb", "text": "Nice piece of writing, Jeff. Corn is a great energy source for cattle, but it's not the ideal food for them. Cattle are healthiest with long-stemmed feed, such as hay and, when in season, field grazing. High energy, processed feed sources will certainly cause cattle to gain weight, but often at a high cost to cattle health. Often diets rich in corn require antibiotics and other medicines to keep the cow's digestive system in balance. The cow's four stomachs are ill-adapted to the small fibers of ground corn and other feeds. Typically, beef calves will suckle the the dam and transition slowly into grazing. In a dairy, calves are often bottle fed and then introduced to hay and grain after several weeks while also being weaned from the milk, usually by diluting the milk with water. This encourages the calf to seek other sources of energy, usually in the form of choice hay, which is usually available in hay racks in each pen.", "timestamp": "1363700359"}, {"author": "Sasha", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=112828752242140", "anchor": "fb-112828752242140", "service": "fb", "text": "Nice analysis, though corn syrup is so harmful (http://www.livescience.com/18244-sugar-toxic-regulations...) that the \u2018free waste\u2019 issue is more complicated. It would be a great boon to human society if reducing meat consumption harmed the corn syrup industry.", "timestamp": "1363701627"}, {"author": "Marcus", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/115811589251174483775", "anchor": "gp-1363702336214", "service": "gp", "text": "The UMASS article has a lower estimate for the percentage of meat that's eaten: 600 pounds of meat from a 1,300 pound animal.\u00a0 If you're going to use their estimates, which seem reasonable enough, you should use all of their estimates rather than cherry-pick from different sources to inflate your numbers.\n
\n
\nThe larger point seems to be more that seitan is a surprising inefficient use of grain. I think, however, you would be hard pressed to find anyone who consumes 60 pounds of seitan annually, which is how much beef the average American consumes.\n
\n
\nLastly, that brings an interesting question of grass-fed vs. corn-fed beef.\u00a0 Beef cattle are typically \"finished\" on a diet of corn after eating grass when they're younger, because it increases the meat yield.\u00a0 People will often buy (exclusively) grass-fed beef both because it tastes better, but also because of lower environmental impact.\u00a0 That leads to the question, if it's necessary to feed a cow more grass than finishing it on corn, if the impact still lower?\n
\n
\nResearch suggests that grazing can have a positive impact on grasslands when done properly though: \nhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpTHi7O66pI", "timestamp": 1363702336}, {"author": "Eric", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=112837105574638", "anchor": "fb-112837105574638", "service": "fb", "text": "When we wash wheat to make gluten, does the washed away part of the wheat go to waste?", "timestamp": "1363702545"}, {"author": "Jan-Willem", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/100580955183019057735", "anchor": "gp-1363704296591", "service": "gp", "text": "Grass-fed beef is great so long as we don't turn over more viable cropland to grazing than we are currently using to grow feed grain. \u00a0Classically, for example, I understand we used this in rotation to increase soil viability in cropland and reduce total resources required for grain growth...", "timestamp": 1363704296}, {"author": "Marcus", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/115811589251174483775", "anchor": "gp-1363705144997", "service": "gp", "text": "Also some animals are even less efficient consumers of grain than cows.\u00a0 Fish, for one.", "timestamp": 1363705144}, {"author": "Marcus", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/115811589251174483775", "anchor": "gp-1363705205257", "service": "gp", "text": "Much of the world's land is not suitable for cultivation but is capable of being used for pasture.", "timestamp": 1363705205}, {"author": "Kiran", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=112877015570647", "anchor": "fb-112877015570647", "service": "fb", "text": "We could certainly feed them grass instead of corn, and the meat would be higher in healthy fats. But there's another problem with this argument: Westerners get far too many carbs in their diets already. Cows turn relatively harmful corn into much less harmful fat and protein.", "timestamp": "1363706221"}, {"author": "Adam", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=112887858902896", "anchor": "fb-112887858902896", "service": "fb", "text": "Kiran, the only reason that corn is so popular as a feed is that it is subsidized for corn syrup, ethanol and livestock feed. Other byproducts are also derived from corn. It is a ridiculously high energy input crop that gives nothing back to the soil and it's not an ideal food for cattle. We don't have a true \"surplus\" of corn. There's no reason that the land could not be in grass or another low input crop.", "timestamp": "1363706645"}, {"author": "Shirley", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=112893158902366", "anchor": "fb-112893158902366", "service": "fb", "text": "Grass fed beef is much more efficient. If the grass is on land that is not suitable for food crops, then you're getting food instead of zero food from that land which is clearly a win.
On the other hand, there is some concern about the methane output of cattle and its greenhouse gas contribution.", "timestamp": "1363707065"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=112893438902338", "anchor": "fb-112893438902338", "service": "fb", "text": "@Eric: \"When we wash wheat to make gluten, does the washed away part of the wheat go to waste?\"
As far as I can tell, yes. You end up with starch in a large quantity of water that is hard to do anything with.", "timestamp": "1363707101"}, {"author": "Marcus", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/111675838261170541573", "anchor": "gp-1363707687214", "service": "gp", "text": "There must be lifecycle analysis literature out there which has looked at the full set of impacts: mind you, coming up with a single metric would be difficult:\n
\ne.g., for beef: counting the pounds of grain fed to cattle during finishing is the easy part. How do you value the impacts of setting land aside for grazing (which could be a net positive in some regions, but definitely a negative in regions where they are deforesting)? What about the impact of waste products from the CAFO? Methane emissions? And a really good LCA would even look at what is being displaced by non-meat products from the cow: eg, is using the hide for leather displacing plastics being used for synthetics or some natural fiber product?\n
\n
\nSecond, you need to pick the right substitute product: I would think beans, nuts, and tofu are all more traditional sources for protein in a vegetarian diet than is seitan. And then do an LCA on that crop, looking at fertilizer, water, and land use as well as considering any\u00a0 side products (eg, are parts of the plants that aren't used in the consumer product burned for energy, returned to the land, or, heh, used for feeding livestock).\n
\n
\nAn economist might also suggest looking at the relative prices as a rough guide to determine the relative quantity of resources involved in production compared to a substitute, though that won't address externalities or market-distorting taxes and subsidies.", "timestamp": 1363707687}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/103013777355236494008", "anchor": "gp-1363707855115", "service": "gp", "text": "@Marcus\n\u00a0\"The UMASS article has a lower estimate for the percentage of meat that's eaten: 600 pounds of meat from a 1,300 pound animal. \u00a0If you're going to use their estimates, which seem reasonable enough, you should use all of their estimates rather than cherry-pick from different sources to inflate your numbers.\"\n
\n
\nI used the 62% from the original article because it was in the middle of the range I'd seen, and I didn't divide out the numbers from the UMASS article to see that they were lower. \u00a0I was getting the numbers from:\n
\n
\n\"How much of a cow carcass becomes meat depends on whom you talk to. The United States Department of Agriculture says 70 percent, some knowledgeable cattle buyers say 63 percent, and the British government's studies say 53 percent.\" --\u00a0\n
\nhttp://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/20/opinion/editorial-observer-the-whole-cow-and-nothing-but-the-whole-cow.html\n
\n
\nThe UMASS number would be 46%, which is quite a bit lower. \u00a0Looking more, I think the problem may be the word \"carcass\". \u00a0While I was interpreting that to mean the whole dead cow (full weight) the UMASS page says \"carcasses are generally 63 to 65% of the 1,250 pounds\". \u00a0I need to look more into the NYT numbers to find out\u00a0how they were using the term, and look at their sources.", "timestamp": 1363707855}, {"author": "Marcus", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/115811589251174483775", "anchor": "gp-1363708028806", "service": "gp", "text": "Corn is a rather high impact grain, requiring more fertilizer than most.\u00a0 A vegetarian diet should not require large amounts of protein substitutes, if its well balanced, none at all really. Seitan vs. beef is a false choice.", "timestamp": 1363708028}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=112909248900757", "anchor": "fb-112909248900757", "service": "fb", "text": "@Will: \"4,000-18,000 gallons of water to produce 1/3 pound of hamburger\"
I'm just focusing on the \"pounds of grain per pound of beef\" statistic here, but I suspect that if someone dug deeply into the \"gallons of water per pound of beef\" statistic they would find a lot of confusing data and strange assumptions. Do you have a source that breaks the water consumption down, including what fraction is from irrigation? Ideally one that runs the same breakdown on other foods we eat?", "timestamp": "1363708428"}, {"author": "Paul", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=112911365567212", "anchor": "fb-112911365567212", "service": "fb", "text": "Corn is King in Iowa, and Iowa boxes above its weight in the presidential selection process, which makes corn subsidies difficult to dislodge.", "timestamp": "1363708699"}, {"author": "BDan", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=112926518899030", "anchor": "fb-112926518899030", "service": "fb", "text": "Soemthing else relevant: when rotated through grasslands properly (meaning not allowed to just eat everything in sight), herds of grazing animals can actually prevent (and even reverse) desertification. http://www.ted.com/.../allan_savory_how_to_green_the...
This is not how most animals are raised now, so it doesn't apply to most current meat production, but it could make a big difference if it were implemented globally.", "timestamp": "1363710344"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/103013777355236494008", "anchor": "gp-1363711260183", "service": "gp", "text": "@Marcus\n\u00a0\"A vegetarian diet should not require large amounts of protein substitutes, if its well balanced, none at all really\"\n
\n
\nI agree with you that the environmentally minimal diet is probably vegetarian and doesn't include seitan.", "timestamp": 1363711260}, {"author": "Marcus", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/115811589251174483775", "anchor": "gp-1363713355559", "service": "gp", "text": "Yes, though it's location dependent as well.\u00a0 If you lived, say, in rural Mongolia, the environmental impact of eating fresh vegetables regularly would be substantially higher than eating a diet primarily of meat and dairy.", "timestamp": 1363713355}, {"author": "Beth", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=112995898892092", "anchor": "fb-112995898892092", "service": "fb", "text": "i agree that there are plenty of foods that are wasteful; and if we start talking about seasons and shipping food across the globe that's a whole other can of worms. but you don't need seitan and tofu to be vegan. even if the stats have been stretched i think you'd be hard pressed to say that factory farming was sustainable in any fashion. water. i'm sure that stat includes water intensive crops grown to support industrial meat on land that could be used to farm more edible, less intensive crops. there's also antibiotic and hormone use, and waste from these farms. we could do it better. of course there are farms that do. if you don't want to go veg but want to stop contributing to the big industrial farms you could always find a local smaller farm that does graze and works to minimize their environmental impact. the animals have better quality of life in most cases too.", "timestamp": "1363718310"}, {"author": "Will", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=113003445558004", "anchor": "fb-113003445558004", "service": "fb", "text": "@Jeff - here's what on the surface looks like a fairly careful analysis that indicates a much lower water use: \"The model predicts that 3,682 L of water are required to produce a kilogram of boneless beef under current beef production systems employed in the United States. This compares to previous estimates of 20,864 L/kg of meat and 20,559 L/kg of boneless beef (Robbins, 1987; Kreith, 1991). \" http://www.journalofanimalscience.org/.../71/4/818.full.pdf", "timestamp": "1363719406"}, {"author": "Will", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=113004322224583", "anchor": "fb-113004322224583", "service": "fb", "text": "And here is another seemingly careful analysis that indicates a much higher usage, as in 15,000 L /kg beef or just under 7000 L/pound. http://www.waterfootprint.org/.../Report-48...", "timestamp": "1363719548"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=113007052224310", "anchor": "fb-113007052224310", "service": "fb", "text": "@Will: \"3,682 L of water are required to produce a kilogram of boneless beef \"
It looks like the water usage they found for beef is about half from pasture irrigation and half from crop irrigation. So they're finding 442 gallons per pound of beef. Without reading beyond the abstract, my guess is that they mostly differ from other studies by only counting irrigation water, which is why their number is so much lower than others.", "timestamp": "1363719818"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=113011312223884", "anchor": "fb-113011312223884", "service": "fb", "text": "@Will: \"another seemingly careful analysis that indicates a much higher usage\"
That one is giving 1850 gallons of water per pound of beef. I need to read both in more detail to understand the differences in their calculations. It looks like your second article divides water into \"green\", \"blue\", and \"grey\" components while the first one might be counting only what the second calls \"blue\" water. Not sure.", "timestamp": "1363720295"}, {"author": "Beth", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=113018922223123", "anchor": "fb-113018922223123", "service": "fb", "text": "http://usda.gov/wps/portal/usda/usdahome... has usda stats and reports on livestock farming. the epa redesigned their site and i'm going to have to dig for the farming reports. there are of course many reports put out by animal organizations such as the hsus, compassion over killing, and peta. some more reputable than others. i found a report by john hopkins too, haven't read it yet. i'll email you the pdf if you want.", "timestamp": "1363721445"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=113039465554402", "anchor": "fb-113039465554402", "service": "fb", "text": "@Beth: posting pdf links is better than emailing them", "timestamp": "1363724405"}, {"author": "Brice", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=113090942215921", "anchor": "fb-113090942215921", "service": "fb", "text": "you re putting food quantity over both nutrient and life quality and diversity. what is the purpose of doing that ? sustain overpopulation and avoid the humble self restriction intelligent species should have ? the numbers are irrelevant. the system is obsessing. there are heavier patterns people miss to appreciate.", "timestamp": "1363732534"}, {"author": "Ben", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/105971154852908006603", "anchor": "gp-1363740542143", "service": "gp", "text": "Note to self: eat less seitan.", "timestamp": 1363740542}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/103013777355236494008", "anchor": "gp-1363744850943", "service": "gp", "text": "@Ben\n\u00a0seitan is definitely less efficient than beans or something as a protein source, but a lot of our non-meat non-leagume protein sources involve a bunch of concentrating which means waste. \u00a0Cheese for example.", "timestamp": 1363744850}, {"author": "Kiran", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=113431205515228", "anchor": "fb-113431205515228", "service": "fb", "text": "True, corn produces more calories but they're bad ones. Cows produce fewer, but they're good ones. And I concur--if the rest of the world can't sustain meat production, they need fewer people, not more bad calories.", "timestamp": "1363771259"}, {"author": "Mick", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=113558165502532", "anchor": "fb-113558165502532", "service": "fb", "text": "Where I buy my beef its zero pounds of grains. http://www.swissconnectioncheese.com/", "timestamp": "1363782785"}, {"author": "Jan-Willem", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/100580955183019057735", "anchor": "gp-1363785842440", "service": "gp", "text": "This is always my big question for folks who make their own cheese: What do they do with all that whey? \u00a0There's more whey than cheese. Another thing we used to feed to the pigs I think...", "timestamp": 1363785842}, {"author": "Steven", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=113650702159945", "anchor": "fb-113650702159945", "service": "fb", "text": "Soylent Green would be the most efficient diet. Mmm :) Or as Kiran recommends, fewer people.", "timestamp": "1363791427"}, {"author": "Bruce", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=113705212154494", "anchor": "fb-113705212154494", "service": "fb", "text": "Does anyone on this thread believe that vegetarianism is not healthier for the planet?", "timestamp": "1363792924"}, {"author": "b", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/109680641548243670506", "anchor": "gp-1363798508863", "service": "gp", "text": "How much waste is involved in the concentrating depends on what larger process it's embedded in. For example, I believe that TVP is a by-product of soybean oil production. If this is right, then it's concentrated protein that would otherwise be waste protein or be used in the same concentrated-protein state for some other purpose.", "timestamp": 1363798508}, {"author": "b", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/109680641548243670506", "anchor": "gp-1363798699822", "service": "gp", "text": "Similarly, the leftover substance from soymilk/tofu production is edible and is used as food in some cultures, so if you can use both parts that would presumably be relatively efficient:\u00a0\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Okara_%28food%29", "timestamp": 1363798699}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/103013777355236494008", "anchor": "gp-1363811727377", "service": "gp", "text": "@Jan-Willem\n\u00a0\"Another thing we used to feed to the pigs\"\n
\n
\nWe should feed more of our food waste to pigs.", "timestamp": 1363811727}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/103013777355236494008", "anchor": "gp-1363811952149", "service": "gp", "text": "@benjamin\n\u00a0\"the leftover substance from soymilk/tofu production is edible and is used as food in some cultures\"\n
\n
\nIt's usually used as animal feed, right? \u00a0(Which presumably reduces the cost of meat, which means other people probably consume more. \u00a0But I doubt this effect is strong enough to make up for the meat that you don't eat by switching to tofu.)", "timestamp": 1363811952}, {"author": "Kiran", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=113976722127343", "anchor": "fb-113976722127343", "service": "fb", "text": "Healthier for the planet in what sense? I think hunting and gathering is *much* healthier for the planet than agriculture of any era (not just modern industrial agriculture) and Joel Salatan makes a very strong case for meat farming being better for the environment than pretty much any other form of intensive agriculture. But I'm more concerned with things healthier for humans, and as commonly practiced I think vegetarianism is suboptimal for human well-being.", "timestamp": "1363819843"}, {"author": "Wayne", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=219682708223410", "anchor": "fb-219682708223410", "service": "fb", "text": "", "timestamp": "1392911551"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=219684874889860", "anchor": "fb-219684874889860", "service": "fb", "text": "@Wayne: I haven't, but if you wanted to send me your figures I'd be happy to look at them.", "timestamp": "1392912099"}, {"author": "Wayne", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=219709328220748", "anchor": "fb-219709328220748", "service": "fb", "text": "", "timestamp": "1392915339"}, {"author": "Wayne", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=219709518220729", "anchor": "fb-219709518220729", "service": "fb", "text": "", "timestamp": "1392915467"}, {"author": "BDan", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=219712391553775", "anchor": "fb-219712391553775", "service": "fb", "text": "Kiran, no one has ever done a controlled long-term nutritional study of anything, so your claims are unsupported. See http://www.nytimes.com/.../why-nutrition-is-so-confusing... . Just for an anecdote, though, I have been vegetarian and subsisting largely on (whole) grains for a decade, and I am pretty healthy -- my total cholesterol is about 115, for example.", "timestamp": "1392916126"}, {"author": "Wayne", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=219712721553742", "anchor": "fb-219712721553742", "service": "fb", "text": "", "timestamp": "1392916282"}, {"author": "Ruthan", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/112741008917581?comment_id=219741604884187", "anchor": "fb-219741604884187", "service": "fb", "text": "suddenly, hyperbole!", "timestamp": "1392927583"}]}