Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 51 to 56 of 56

Thread: Vegetarian Fake Meats

  1. Top | #51
    Sapere aude Politesse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Chochenyo Territory, US
    Posts
    3,015
    Rep Power
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by spikepipsqueak View Post
    Ran across a program yesterday where someone said out loud something that logic has always suggested to me.

    The claim that meat uses huge resources in production is based on intensive factory farming methods. Livestock that is grass fed in paddocks - not so much.
    Which is why we should greatly reduce meat consumption. If it were all being raised sustainably, there'd be no ecological issue. But it obviously is not, and volume of demand has a lot to do with that.

  2. Top | #52
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Located 100 miles east of A in America
    Posts
    25,720
    Archived
    42,473
    Total Posts
    68,193
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by bilby View Post
    It's a rarely mentioned fact that people (particularly rich people) don't really eat many fully grown animals. We prefer to eat babies - particularly lamb, but most beef and pork comes from relatively young animals too.

    Dairy cows live much longer lives than those raised for meat, even when the meat is beef rather than veal.

    Some people find this disturbing; But of course if they weren't raised for meat, milk, or eggs, most domesticated animals wouldn't exist at all.

    If everyone became a vegetarian, livestock species would rapidly become extinct (or at least endangered).

    It seems unlikely that widespread vegetarianism would be only positive for our environment, though it would probably be a net positive. The negative effects are certainly something we should consider, in the unlikely event that such a behavioural shift became plausible.
    I’m a bit more worried about the global impact on antibiotic resistance due to the huge amounts used to grow meat. That’ll likely have a bigger effect than any large switch to vegetarianism.

  3. Top | #53
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    West Hollywood
    Posts
    3,959
    Rep Power
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by Politesse View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by spikepipsqueak View Post
    Ran across a program yesterday where someone said out loud something that logic has always suggested to me.

    The claim that meat uses huge resources in production is based on intensive factory farming methods. Livestock that is grass fed in paddocks - not so much.
    Which is why we should greatly reduce meat consumption.
    You could go some way to achieving that by also reducing the number of consumers in general.

  4. Top | #54
    Administrator lpetrich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Lebanon, OR
    Posts
    7,448
    Archived
    16,829
    Total Posts
    24,277
    Rep Power
    81
    Almonds are out. Dairy is a disaster. So what milk should we drink? | Environment | The Guardian noting Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers | Science

    From The Guardian (Grauniad):
    All milk alternatives are far better for the planet than dairy. A 2018 study by researchers at the University of Oxford showed that producing a glass of dairy milk results in almost three times more greenhouse gas emissions than any plant-based milk and it consumes nine times more land than any of the milk alternatives. (Land is required to pasture the cows and grow their feed, which the animals belch out in the form of methane.)
    Coconut: ‘An absolute tragedy’
    Because coconut trees only grow in tropical climates, the pressure to meet global demand is causing exploitation of workers and destruction of rainforests. “Coconut is an absolute tragedy and it makes me really sad,” Isaac Emery, a food sustainability consultant. “I love cooking with coconut milk but I don’t feel good about buying coconut products. Farmers in Indonesia should be growing food to feed their families instead of meeting international demands.”
    Almond: bad for bees
    Almonds require more water than any other dairy alternative, consuming 130 pints of water to produce a single glass of almond milk, according to the Oxford study. Satisfying continual demands for larger almond crops is also placing unsustainable pressures on US commercial beekeepers. Nearly 70% of commercial bees in the US are drafted every spring to pollinate almonds. Last year, a record number –over one-third of them– died by season’s end as a result of these pressures and other environmental threats.
    Rice: a water-guzzler
    Rice is a water hog, according to the Oxford study, plus it produces more greenhouse gas emissions than any other plant milk. Bacteria breeding in rice paddies pump methane into the atmosphere and large amounts of fertilizer pollute waterways.
    Hazelnut: on the up
    For consumers who want the nutritiousness and tastiness of a nut milk but without the environmental impacts of almond farming, the hazelnut is a rising star. ... Hazelnuts are environmentally superior to almonds in that they are pollinated by the wind rather than commercial honeybees and they grow in moist climates, such as the Pacific north-west, where water is less of an issue.
    Hemp and flax: niche contenders
    They are grown in relatively small quantities in the northern hemisphere, which makes them more environmentally friendly compared with a monoculture operation.
    Soy: back in favor
    According to the Oxford study, soy milk is the joint winner on the sustainability scale. Plus, soy is the only plant milk that comes close to offering a protein content comparable to dairy.
    Oat: a humble hero
    Meet the winner: the unassuming oat.

    “I’m excited about the surge in oat milk popularity,” says Liz Specht, associate director of science and technology for the Good Food Institute, a not-for-profit that promotes plant-based diets. “Oat milk performs very well on all sustainability metrics.” Also: “I highly doubt there will be unintended environmental consequences that might emerge when the scale of oat milk use gets larger.”
    The bottom line: as long as it’s not dairy
    Both Emery and Specht emphasize that whether it’s coconut, soy or oat, consumers should drink whatever plant milk is most appealing to them and not fret over sustainability shortcomings, which are chump change compared with the environmental harms from dairy.

  5. Top | #55
    Administrator lpetrich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Lebanon, OR
    Posts
    7,448
    Archived
    16,829
    Total Posts
    24,277
    Rep Power
    81
    We’re Very Close to Disrupting the Cow - Fast Company - Medium - "By 2030, these scientists estimate the number of cows in the U.S. will have fallen by 50% and the beef and dairy industries will have collapsed as animal-derived foods are replaced by modern equivalents"
    An unstoppable trifecta of fast-improving technology, new business models, and fast-falling costs is creating the deepest, most consequential disruption of food and agriculture in ten thousand years. We face the end of the cattle industry as we know it, and the exponential market growth of inexpensive, high-quality, tasty modern food designed using food-as-software technology based on precise consumer specifications.
    Then talked about how "precision fermentation" is becoming cheaper and cheaper, to the point where it can easily compete with animal proteins.
    Today, 90% of American-made cheese uses PF proteins. (This is not genetic modification of foods. Proteins have no genetic material so they can’t be genetically modified.) The cost of PF is falling exponentially, from $1 million per kilogram in 2000 to about $100 today. Assuming existing technologies, we project these costs will fall to $10 per kilogram by 2023 to 25. PF proteins will be five times cheaper than animal proteins by 2030 and 10 times cheaper by 2035.

  6. Top | #56
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Located 100 miles east of A in America
    Posts
    25,720
    Archived
    42,473
    Total Posts
    68,193
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Higgins View Post
    Impossible Whopper - Well... I'd say it was almost impossible to taste the burger itself. With 400 or so calories of mayo on it, they could have put styrofoam with the tomato and lettuce and the experience would have been similar. Yes, there is a slight sensation of a smokey taste, but overall, I could hardly even tell there was a patty between the buns to start with, it being so thin and overpowered by the mayo. The texture was meatish, but really, I didn't feel like I was having a burger.

    The Beyond Meat burger I had included condiments and cheese at home. That worked out, the closest to meat that I've had. Surely not a 1 to 1 replacement, but very good.
    A comment on the Beyond Meat burger. Having two of them with buns really does fill the belly up. Having two morningstar or Boca burgers does not have the same effect. I could eat two Beyond Meat burgers and that'd be it for a meal. Nothing else required.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •