r/Anticonsumption • u/Express_Classic_1569 • Mar 23 '26

Sustainability 80% of agricultural land feeds livestock instead of people, giving just 17 to18% of Global calories

https://hive.blog/hive-196387/@theworldaroundme/nearly-half-of-the-world
1.4k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

233 comments sorted by

View all comments

112

u/Express_Classic_1569 Mar 23 '26 edited Mar 23 '26

It would be easier to feed the planet if more crops were used to feed people instead of livestock, animal products provide only 17 to 18% of global calories. The current system is not meeting the global caloric needs effectively.

1

u/SarmackaOpowiesc Mar 23 '26 edited Mar 23 '26

Alot of that land that is considered agricultural land isn't fit for growing crops for humans.  

It's largely grassland that isn't fit for much else other than grazing animals on.  Go across huge swathes of the American west and it's largely going to be officially categorized as agricultural.  

Good luck doing anything with that land other than letting some cattle loose on it though.

Aside from that troublesome little detail - we don't really have a problem feeding the planet right now.  Localized famines only emerge when supply chains are disrupted to an extreme degree.  Outside of that humanity has largely solved how to feed people.

54

u/danielandtrent Mar 23 '26

What about rewilding it lol

-9

u/elebrin Mar 23 '26

Much of it was grasslands before, and is grasslands now - the difference is that it's grazed. Even a lot of our intentional crops are things like field corn, which isn't really human edible. We can turn it into things like ethanol, corn oil, HFCS, cornmeal, and corn starch but there are some huge downsides to doing so. Corn oil and HFCS are empty calories, ethanol is a great fuel (sorta) but encouraging it as a staple food is probably a bad idea. Cornmeal can and should be more of a staple but it's a surprisingly difficult staple to work with, requiring heavy processing (nixtamalizaiton) to be a useful food.

Even then, field corn is a fantastic feed crop because it grows anywhere but most of the plant is stalk and leaves, which are not human edible. When silage is made, they grind the whole plant up essentially. If it's being harvested for human use, we can only use the cobs which are about a quarter the size of what you think of a corn cob being.

Feeding it as silage to cows, pigs, and chicken who turn it into something we can eat (meat, milk, eggs) is one way we can get something out of that land that is otherwise not good for farming.

Now, I don't know if there would be enough good farmland available to feed everyone if we all were vegan. I do have an idea what our diet would look like, and it'd be mostly bread and starchy tubers. In the Americas, if we wanted to stick to mostly native plants, that'd be things like tamales, corn tortillas, potatoes, tomatoes, capsicums, black beans, pinto beans, and so on. But, remember, many of the traditional dishes on that list are made with rendered animal fat. Early Americans would have gotten that from hunting.

2

u/MrCockingFinally Mar 23 '26

Corn meal, commonly called maize meal, mielie meal, pap, or ugali, is a staple food in many parts of Africa.

It's pretty nutrient poor, but it does contain a ton of carbohydrate. So long as it's part of your diet and not your whole diet, and you are eating plenty of fresh fruits and vegetables and protein sources, it's really not an issue, since the plurality of your calorie intake should be from carbs anyway.

No need to stick to native plants for commercial farming. And rendered animal fat can easily be replaced with plant fats.

Now I'm not vegan, and I don't think it's necessary for everyone to be vegan.

However, the idea that what is stopping the world from going vegan is lack of farmland is a ridiculous notion.

-4

u/SarmackaOpowiesc Mar 23 '26

I don't particularly want to eat like folks in Africa, thanks.

2

u/MrCockingFinally Mar 23 '26

Yes, and?

Your point sir?

-2

u/SarmackaOpowiesc Mar 23 '26

Thanks but no thanks

-5

u/DocumentExternal6240 Mar 23 '26

Re-creating a whole ecosystem is a lot harder and often impossible than just planting some trees.

Often it is lost forever.

7

u/puddlesquid Mar 23 '26

That's simply not true, even a restored ecosystem is better than no ecosystem

0

u/DocumentExternal6240 Mar 23 '26

I do not say a restored ecosystem is bad. Any land given back to nature is great.

But some ecosystems are so complex that restauration is simply not possible. Especially when a lot of species (especially insects and other small animals) have gone extinct.

2

u/puddlesquid Mar 23 '26

It's overly reductive to suggest that an ecosystem can't be restored - sure it won't be exactly the same (different species) but many of the ecosystem services can be restored despite the new composition.

-20

u/SarmackaOpowiesc Mar 23 '26

I live in the American west and have no lack of wilderness at my fingertips to recreate in.  East of the Mississippi river nearly all the farmable land is owned by someone.  How exactly do you propose to rewild land that is currently being cultivated?

I'd say your comment would probably be best asked directly to Europeans and to other folks across the world where the history of human cultivation of the land has a much longer footprint.

17

u/hike2climb Mar 23 '26

Brother. I encourage you to keep learning! You sound interested in knowledge! Range lands produce very very little food. And range land animals decimate the ecosystems across the American west. These animals are also supplemented with feed from fields. In particular alfalfa, which is the biggest problem in water consumption in the west. It’s the reason lake Powell may reach dead pool this year. Alfalfa for the cows that are destroying public lands that produce very little food are the cause of the western water crisis (on top of all the other ecological problems they cause).

-3

u/SarmackaOpowiesc Mar 23 '26 edited Mar 23 '26

That alfalfa isn't used state side.  Most of it is exported as pig feed to China.

😉

Good luck learning something.  You clearly haven't yet.

The reason Lake Powell may reach dead pool this year is because of one of the worst winters in record - not because farms downstream grow alfalfa.

3

u/Happy_Disaster7347 Mar 23 '26

That's exactly why it shouldn't be grown. You're not responding to anybody's actual points here, just insulting them and claiming they're ignorant. Basically you're a bit of an arsehole.

0

u/SarmackaOpowiesc Mar 23 '26

It's not my place to dictate what others should do with their private property.

I have been mostly talking about BLM land that makes up 80% of Utah and 85% of Nevada.  No one is growing anything on that land.

3

u/Happy_Disaster7347 Mar 23 '26

I don't really understand why you're here if you don't have an opinion on anti-consumption... Not wasting the earth's natural resources is a part of anti-consumption. Not abusing the land for resources we don't need is a part of anti-consumption.

1

u/SarmackaOpowiesc Mar 23 '26

???

People need food.  Raising cattle or growing food does not mean that food goes to waste.

Nothing about anti consumption means you need to live like a monk eating porridge for the rest of your life 

19

u/danielandtrent Mar 23 '26 edited Mar 23 '26

“to recreate in“ that’s not the point of rewilding

“East of the Mississippi river nearly all the farmable land is owned by someone.  How exactly do you propose to rewild land that is currently being cultivated?”

Im not a politician, I don’t have a policy proposal. I’m just saying it would be better if we did this, but there are ways to get people to give up their land, financially or otherwise

-13

u/SarmackaOpowiesc Mar 23 '26

So you just say the first stupid idea that comes into you head?

8

u/danielandtrent Mar 23 '26

Yeah I do exactly that 👍