logoalt Hacker News

lotsofpulptoday at 10:43 AM3 repliesview on HN

I imagine the fertilizers used for the grass to support the quantity and quality of the cows’ output require quite a bit of fossil fuels.

Otherwise, I wonder if non fertilizer supported grass could support sufficient cows to satiate demand (which has not even peaked yet).


Replies

ZeroGravitastoday at 2:55 PM

Always worth noting that the fertilizers don't require fossil fuels, just currently use them as they are cheaper if you ignore the externalities and alternatives haven't got the scale yet.

Pro-fossil fuel types will regularly claim fossil fuels are a hard requirement for fertilizer.

show 1 reply
modo_mariotoday at 11:25 AM

Oh true and we consequently need to eat less cow meat, more different meat and/or have less people.

but focusing on that is shifting blame in an innefectual way of course. Pointing at cow farts puts the pressure on the individual and seeks to dampen effects in the short term. Pump up less or no fossil fuels with actual long term thinking and those fertilisers will automatically become more expensive. At that point tho our oversized animal herd becomes harder to support and beef becomes automatically a lot more expensive whilst at the same time the manure becomes more important.