If the world goes completely vegan

auspicious wrote: »

The average water footprint per calorie for beef is twenty times larger than for cereals and starchy roots. When we look at the water requirements for protein, it has been found that the water footprint per gram of protein for milk, eggs and chicken meat is about 1.5 times larger than for pulses. For beef, the water footprint per gram of protein is 6 times larger than for pulses. In the case of fat, butter has a relatively small water footprint per gram of fat, even lower than for oil crops. All other animal products, however, have larger water footprints per gram of fat when compared to oil crops. From a freshwater resource perspective, it is more efficient to obtain calories, protein and fat through crop products than animal products.

Vegetables 26 litres required per gram of protein
Bovine meat 112 litres per gram of protein.

https://waterfootprint.org/en/water-footprint/product-water-footprint/water-footprint-crop-and-animal-products/#:~:text=Global%20animal%20production%20requires%20about,the%20feed%20for%20the%20animals.

Humans account for 0.01 percent of the planet's biomass. Human activity has reduced the biomass of marine live and terrestrial mammals by 6 times and the biomass of plant matter by half.

Humans account for 36% of mammalian biomass.
Livestock biomass ( pigs and cows mostly) 60%.
And wildlife mammalian biomass is now a paltry 4%.

I was thinking feck that, surly cattle don't drink that much. Then I saw the yellow highlighting were it says 98% is for growing the food for the cattle. Would that include the rain water on grass?

auspicious wrote: »

The average water footprint per calorie for beef is twenty times larger than for cereals and starchy roots. When we look at the water requirements for protein, it has been found that the water footprint per gram of protein for milk, eggs and chicken meat is about 1.5 times larger than for pulses. For beef, the water footprint per gram of protein is 6 times larger than for pulses. In the case of fat, butter has a relatively small water footprint per gram of fat, even lower than for oil crops. All other animal products, however, have larger water footprints per gram of fat when compared to oil crops. From a freshwater resource perspective, it is more efficient to obtain calories, protein and fat through crop products than animal products.

Vegetables 26 litres required per gram of protein
Bovine meat 112 litres per gram of protein.

https://waterfootprint.org/en/water-footprint/product-water-footprint/water-footprint-crop-and-animal-products/#:~:text=Global%20animal%20production%20requires%20about,the%20feed%20for%20the%20animals.

Humans account for 0.01 percent of the planet's biomass. Human activity has reduced the biomass of marine live and terrestrial mammals by 6 times and the biomass of plant matter by half.

Humans account for 36% of mammalian biomass.
Livestock biomass ( pigs and cows mostly) 60%.
And wildlife mammalian biomass is now a paltry 4%.

I'm not going to go through all the figures.
We have a damp climate here in Ireland, suitable for growing grass, but little else. That's why we can produce so much meat, quite extensively and free range.
However, it would be economic suicide if we tried to grow the same area in crops. We simply do not have the climate for it. The pressure from pests and diseases would be astronomical.

auspicious wrote: »

Rain water is fresh water, so yes even when it's on the grass in the fields between the winding hedgerows as far as the eye can see. Thankfully there are few trees in the way to obscure the view.

I guess it depends were you live I used to get worked up by a lack of tress comments but I could be lucky as there are some large forestry with mixed trees beside me as well as having many of the local farmers allowing trees to mature in the hedge rows. I guess it's like someone not hearing birds while out for a walk because they have ear buds in.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

What’s your obsession with what’s happening in Ireland ?

Off topic, but, this is boards.ie, an Irish discussion forum. Ireland is number one for me. As far as I know the vast vast majority of posters are posting from Ireland. People in other countries are well able to look after there own patch.
Back on topic now.

auspicious wrote: »

The average water footprint per calorie for beef is twenty times larger than for cereals and starchy roots. When we look at the water requirements for protein, it has been found that the water footprint per gram of protein for milk, eggs and chicken meat is about 1.5 times larger than for pulses. For beef, the water footprint per gram of protein is 6 times larger than for pulses. In the case of fat, butter has a relatively small water footprint per gram of fat, even lower than for oil crops. All other animal products, however, have larger water footprints per gram of fat when compared to oil crops. From a freshwater resource perspective, it is more efficient to obtain calories, protein and fat through crop products than animal products.

Vegetables 26 litres required per gram of protein
Bovine meat 112 litres per gram of protein.

https://waterfootprint.org/en/water-footprint/product-water-footprint/water-footprint-crop-and-animal-products/#:~:text=Global%20animal%20production%20requires%20about,the%20feed%20for%20the%20animals.
...

Unfortunately once again totally misrepresentitive of actual figures for agriculture here

And that is the single biggest problem with basing information on gross global averages and trying to use that as propaganda against farming

For example - you give a figure for a water of Bovine meat 112 litres per gram of protein*

That works out at an incredible 112,000 litres of water for per Kg of beef production.

*For example* The true figure in Ireland is that only 169 lites of water per kg comes which from blue water sources (ie piped water) whilst the remainder of approx 8,222 litres per kg comes from green water sources (ie direct rainfall).

Even ignoring the fact that only a tiny fraction of water use comes from piped sources - your globalised figures don't even come close for total water use here. With just 8,391 litres from all sources being required for beef production.

In detail - Irish milk and beef frainfall do require water - with much of it being supplied from the natural world by direct rainfall. Grass in Ireland has a dry matter content of approx 16-18% depending on whether the grass is on its first or second grazing ground. So during much of the year 82-84% of water use for cattle comes from this direct rainfall

just to reiterate that. With regard to actual water use for beef cattle in Ireland - only 169 lites of water per kg comes from blue water sources (ie fresh water) whilst the remainder of approx 8,222 litres per kg comes from green water sources ( ie water coming direcly from rainfall falling on pasture) and stored in the soil and evaporated, transpired or incorporated by plants and then eaten by livestock.

The project demonstrated that intensification of Irish animal production systems through high utilisation of rain water resources for the production of milk, beef and sheep meat are sustainable from a water use perspective.

Rain water for the production of grass made up 85% of the total water footprint in dairy systems,
88% in beef systems and 87% in sheep production systems. This is a key competitive advantage for Irish agriculture in terms of sustainable food production since the majority of these products are exported to less water rich regions.

Utilising green water resources that are plentiful in Ireland for the production of milk, beef
and sheep meat indicates that recent intensification measures in Food Harvest 2020 and Food Wise 2025 are sustainable from a water use perspective.

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.teagasc.ie/media/website/publications/2018/6190_TechnologyUpdae_JohnUpton_WaterConservation.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwif4OKY5bvhAhUoSBUIHUOhDosQFjANegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw0tHNJ7PwynTsJHBR51aOTC


Note: Green water is the water transpired by the plant that comes from rainfall and water from rainfall  stored in soil. Blue water is the water in our surface and groundwater reservoirs and comes from piped sources

gozunda wrote: »

Unfortunately once again totally misrepresentitive of actual figures for agriculture here

And that is the single biggest problem with basing information on gross global averages and trying to use that as propaganda against farming

For example - you give a figure for a water of Bovine meat 112 litres per gram of protein*

That works out at an incredible 112,000 litres of water for per Kg of beef production.

The true figure in Ireland is that only 169 lites of water per kg comes which from blue water sources (ie piped water) whilst the remainder of approx 8,222 litres per kg comes from green water sources (ie direct rainfall).

Even ignoring the fact that only a tiny fraction of water use comes from piped sources - your globalised figures don't even come close for total water use here. With just 8,391 litres from all sources being required for beef production.

In detail - Irish milk and beef frainfall do require water - with much of it being supplied from the natural world by direct rainfall. Grass in Ireland has a dry matter content of approx 16-18% depending on whether the grass is on its first or second grazing ground. So during much of the year 82-84% of water use for cattle comes from this direct rainfall

just to reiterate that. With regard to actual water use for beef cattle in Ireland - only 169 lites of water per kg comes from blue water sources (ie fresh water) whilst the remainder of approx 8,222 litres per kg comes from green water sources ( ie water coming direcly from rainfall falling on pasture) and stored in the soil and evaporated, transpired or incorporated by plants and then eaten by livestock.




https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.teagasc.ie/media/website/publications/2018/6190_TechnologyUpdae_JohnUpton_WaterConservation.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwif4OKY5bvhAhUoSBUIHUOhDosQFjANegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw0tHNJ7PwynTsJHBR51aOTC


Note: Green water is the water transpired by the plant that comes from rainfall and water from rainfall  stored in soil. Blue water is the water in our surface and groundwater reservoirs and comes from piped sources

Not misrepresentitive as at no time did I mention Ireland.
Not propaganda. Just simple global statistics.
Ireland is a small part of the bigger picture.

auspicious wrote: »

Not misrepresentitive as at no time did I mention Ireland.
Not propaganda. Just simple global statistics.
Ireland is a small part of the bigger picture.

It's misrepresentitive and grossly inaccurate as data from countries such as US farming massively skews the data on water usage etc. I used Ireland as an example to highlight this. This means such average figures are not representative for the majority of countries.

auspicious wrote: »

Global. Global. Averages.
All countries sit on the globe.
Glo-bal.

Yes I'm aware of the term "global. That was my point. Doesn't make the use of such figures any more representative or even useful. That's all.

El Tarangu wrote: »

They should rename this forum "Farming and Forestry Off-Topic chit-chat"

Probable wouldn't go down well but we could set up a vote

Unearthly wrote: »

You're having an absolute nightmare here. Global averages were posted in a topic about the globe and you responded saying misinformation that irish stats are this and that.You are now trying to move the goalposts and cherry picking by taking out the US stats.In a debate you should have the courtesy to retract and move on instead of digging a bigger hole for yourself

Unearthly. Whats with the aggressive tone? There's no "nightmare" etc It's a discussion. I did not say anything was "misinformation" btw - I labelled it misrepresentitive - as that is what it is. I've clearly called out global averages on such things as water use are absolutely meaningless. To highlight this I used Ireland as an example

And yes US stats tend to skew all such calculations. Thats in a nutshell.

White Clover wrote: »

Food produced from grazing livestock such as dairy, beef and sheep is good for the environment. Pasture grazing captures large amounts of carbon and stores it securely in the ground.

This model only works if you you decide to ignore the methane emissions coming from livestock - methane is a far, far more potent greenhouse gas than CO2.

On the other hand, when ground is tilled to plant crops, carbon is released.

40% of the world's grain production is fed to livestock - apart from all of cow farts, there is enormous environmental devastation brought about by the production of this grain (think rainforest destruction in South America).

That is why, the promotion of a plant based diet is so dangerous to the environment.

This is why, if you choose to ignore the elements that don't suit your agenda, you can put two and two together and end up with five.

Markcheese wrote: »

My own view is it's unlikely we'll all go vegan , ever ..
But that'd not to say far more people won't go vegan .. and those who don't will probably eat a lot less meat and dairy ect .. probably because the demands on farmers will be greater ,so the prices will be higher ..
Actually this provides a huge opportunity for irish agriculture, to deintensify , have higher welfare and environmental standards and serious amounts of carbon sequestration .. all while making a few Bob ..
All that's what I'd hope ðŸ˜႒

Another thing that would happen if the world went vegan is you'd have to change your username

listermint wrote: »

Wtf did I just read..... ... ???!

Sorry I missed this post.
I was referring to another thread post on this forum where a particular farmer viewed cattle as 'employees'. They have to earn their living.

El Tarangu wrote: »

This model only works if you you decide to ignore the methane emissions coming from livestock - methane is a far, far more potent greenhouse gas than CO2.



40% of the world's grain production is fed to livestock - apart from all of cow farts, there is enormous environmental devastation brought about by the production of this grain (think rainforest destruction in South America).



This is why, if you choose to ignore the elements that don't suit your agenda, you can put two and two together and end up with five.

Please quit posting untruths and inaccurate information. It gets tiresome having to correct all the false information presented here.
Someone commented that farmers shouldn't be posting on these threads. We wouldn't be here if the information posted was truthful and honest.


Quote:
This study determines that 86% of livestock feed is not suitable for human consumption. If not consumed by livestock, crop residues and by-products could quickly become an environmental burden as the human population grows and consumes more and more processed food. Animals also consume food that could potentially be eaten by people. Grains account for 13% of the global livestock dry matter intake


http://www.fao.org/ag/againfo/home/en/news_archive/2017_More_Fuel_for_the_Food_Feed.html