Difference between revisions of "Tem"

From Alfino
Jump to navigationJump to search
m
m
Line 1: Line 1:
==APR 12: 23 ==
+
==APR 24: 26 ==
  
===Montgomery, Chapter 8: Dirty Business===
 
  
:*Tsangpo River culture in Tibet, exception to soil erosion story.  silt and soil cared for, but also animals fertilize fields. 
+
===Singer and Mason, "Ch 4, Meat and Milk Factories"===
  
:*History of cultivation in China, emergence of wetland rice production (patties allow for nitrogen fixing algae), early 20th cent. 70-80 percent of income on food.  199-2003 crop yields down 10%(Note: Question of food import dependence gets people's attention. [https://www.forbes.com/sites/chriswright/2014/02/11/when-chinas-food-runs-out/#29bdc9636f43]
+
:*"Jake" refers to real interview subjectBook framed around several distinct diets of actual people and then journalism and ethics layered in.
  
:*discoveries of nitrogen and phosphorous (late 18th cent.), potassium and calcium in 1808. (note Justus von Liebig, claim that form of soil ammedment doesn't matter, but still rec. organic soil cultivation), early fertilizer factory, 1843, using sulfuric acid on phosphate to make it available to plants -1843 John Lawes.   
+
:*Pigs
 +
::*90% fewer farms producing 103 million pigs, up from 69 million in 1975. 
 +
::*Pig farms environmental footprint dominated by excrement production.  4x human/day.
 +
::*Pig interior life: smart, can express preferences, natural behaviors include socializing, forming groups, exploring enivronment.  acreage ratios. 
 +
::*Evidence against sow stalls in EU investigation.
 +
::*Interview with pig farmer, Wayne Bradley: small industrial, 10,000 pigs, (Implies large operation approach 700,000). Small examples of welfare: anesthesia for castration, limited nursing to accelerate production, continuous treatment for growth which cause side effects.  Interesting interaction between a small industrial farmer and journalist. Note how tense it was and the allowance of an alternate ending from the farmer.   
  
:*1838: discovery of nitrogen fixing plants, but not till 1888 do we get the microbial mechanismGuano deposits, phosphate mining, Franklin Pierce 1856 Guano Island Act (pretty extraordinary - allowed US citizens to claim guano islands).  set off a kind of "gold rush" over guanoRape of Nauru.
+
:*Milk
 +
::*difficulty sourcing to particular dairy, even specialty brand.  Cf. Pure Eire dairy [https://www.pureeiredairy.com/]
 +
::*Natural behaviors: form friendships, have emotional lives, experience pleasure on figuing something out.  [https://www.wired.com/2014/06/the-emotional-lives-of-dairy-cows/#slide-1]
 +
::*Lawnel Farm: about 900 cows, semi-industrial.  cows indoors all the time, but not tied down, caves separated almost immediately, treatment of downers (
 +
::*BST  (from wiki page: rBST has not been allowed on the market in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Israel, or the European Union since 2000. Argentina also banned the use of rBSTThe FDA, World Health Organization, and National Institutes of Health have independently stated that dairy products and meat from BST-treated cows are safe for human consumption. In the United States, public opinion led some manufacturers and retailers to market only milk that is rBST-free.)
 +
::*Fate of male dairy cowsEthics of veal productionShort life of confinement. Veal production down, but calves often made into pet food (digression on eat production for our carnivorous pets.  yikes.)  Now mostly raised for beef, veal in decline [https://www.statista.com/statistics/194688/us-total-veal-production-since-2000/]
 +
::*air pollution from dairy and cattle production. 
  
:*Pre-civil war Mississippi state geologist, Eugene Hilgard and mid-19th soil science1872: talk on how soil exhaustion shapes fate of civilizations (early version of montgomery's thesis!) Understood importance of manure and replenishing minerals.  Goes to California to figure out problem of alkaline soilsSalt leeching from rock.  "H's 1892 landmark report laid out the basic idea that the physical and chemical character of soils reflect ... regional climate and vegetation. Disputes with South Carolina professor Milton Whitney, who thought moisture and texture alone explained soil fertility. Infamous proclamation as 1901 head of USDA: soil is inexhaustible. King fired by Whitney for agreeing with Hilgardexamples, at 194 of crazy explanations Whitney offered to account for soil depletion without acknowledging itEx. he thought fertilizers accelarated soil production from rocksproductivity differences due to social causes.   
+
:*Beef cows
 +
::*Journalist buying calvesPollan's is "534" - gets growth hormone implant, banned in EU. Problem of feeding a forager grain instead of grassunnatural diet.  "feedlot bloat"
 +
::*History of regulation of meat products as cattle feed after mad cow outbreak. [http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/issues/1040/mad-cow-disease/timeline-mad-cow-disease-outbreaks#]  FDA did ban "beef blood" and other animal products in feed[http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/issues/1040/mad-cow-disease/timeline-mad-cow-disease-outbreaks#]
 +
::*Feedlot runoff: evidence of environment damage in fish alteration in stream with runoff. "endocrine disruption"  manure injection in fields.   
 +
::*Australian ranch: example of "happy meat" -- like "crowd cow"?
 +
::*Ethics of slaughter - some improvement in first time successalso an area in which Temple Grandin has been influentialtraditional slaughter methods, like kosher and halaal are touted as humane when performed properly.   
  
:*193: Story of natural nitrogen formation. Phorphorus mining and depletion by 1st WW.
+
:*Additional sources:
 +
::*US Veal production: [https://www.statista.com/statistics/194688/us-total-veal-production-since-2000/]
 +
::*Local Organic certified grass fed dairy: [https://www.pureeiredairy.com/]
 +
::*Mad Cow Outbreak / Regulation timeline: [http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/issues/1040/mad-cow-disease/timeline-mad-cow-disease-outbreaks#]
 +
::*The Secret Life of cows: [http://www.animalsaustralia.org/issues/secret-lives-of-cows.php]
 +
::*Cow trauma: [https://www.wired.com/2014/06/the-emotional-lives-of-dairy-cows/#slide-1]
  
:*Story of industrial nitrogen: bombs and fertilzer, need to secure sources: 196:German nitro technology.  Fritz Haber.  Haber-Bosch process.  post ww2 nitrogen production, further separated animal ag from plant ag. 1920s new version of the process converts methane to ammonia.  Global nitrogen production, 197. [http://www.fao.org/3/a-i6895e.pdf More current info]
 
  
:*Green Revolution -- high-yield strains for wheat and rice, combined with nitrogen fert.  1970 Nobel Prize to Norman Borlaug. top of 198 - probs with Green Revolution.  By 1980s population growth consumed crop yield growth.  reduced viability of non-capitalized farms.  Mention Songhai Center.  Oil dependence: ag used 30% of petroleum production.  USDA estimate: 1/2 of fertilizer used to replace nutrients lost through soil erosion. 
+
===Estabrook, "Hogonomics"===
  
:*Can organic farming match yields from nitrogen/oil farming?  Pennsylvania study at p. 201.   
+
:*Journalist on a quest to Flying Pigs Farm to discover diff bt $15.00 lb and $3.49 lb porkcomparison
:*Modern Organic Movement: starts with 1930s Sir Albert Howard and Edward Faulkner. animal waste crucial. early composter advocates, early warning on synth nitrogen. Faulkner argued against ploughing.  "alt-Ag" Wes Jackson, Land Institute, Salinas KSCheck them outStill working on a no plough wheat. "natural systems agriculture" (also compatible with "permaculture")
+
::*FP farm: 750 pigs/yr, breeding rates, heritage pigs retain natural behaviors vs. industrial sows' life, living condition diff, labor diff,  
 +
::*Differences in slaughter and "kill fee".  Saline injected pink meatImplied value difference.
  
:*207:  Barry Commoner, Center for Biology of Natural Systems at Wash U.  study claiming organic farms produce similar yields as industrial methods.  Others claims within 2%.  Mid- 80s research by John Reganold [http://css.wsu.edu/people/faculty/john-p-reganold/] on two farms near Spokane, check out his Ted talk [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGBZZh8Oqyo]  What if industrial agriculture is partly a culture conception of how to produce food rather than a market based or science based approach?
+
===Some "Ethical Diets" Logic===
  
:*(Some recent sceptical doubts: Can these results be scaled up? What are the inputs for human labor? p. 208 mentions 1/3 higher labor costs.)
+
:*Very traditional argumentsmeat is toxic. Largely discredited, but see Lancet article on carcinogenicity. Health considerations support reduction of meat consumption, but not elimination.
  
:*208-209: more comparative research on organic/commerical ag. Farm subsidies and effect on farm size/corporate farming. 210  1/10 of ag producers get 2/3 of subsidies.
+
:*Traditional argumentsSuffering and Rights
  
:*211 on: update on no-till and conservation tillingcatching onFood Security Acts of 1985 and 1990 mandate conservation plans for farmssoil erosion contributes directly to climate change - oxidation of organic material releases CO2Soil conservation sequesters co2.
+
::*Suffering: Consider the welfarist position a baseline"What sourcing choices does that exclude?"  Then ask, "Does the animal suffer the loss of its life?" 
 +
:::*Yes: Continuity of life has obvious value to both humans and animals.   
 +
:::*Yes, but: You might agree with the premise of the Yes answer, but argue that "suffering from loss of life" is not suffering you are responsible for.   
 +
:::*Yes and No:  Depends upon the level of sentienceContinuum from plant sentience.  
 +
:::*No: Categorical difference between the way a human "has a life" and the way an animal does. 
  
:*story of Quincy, WACenex toxic fertilizer scandal.   
+
::*Rights: Strength of rights position depends upon basis for asserting rights.  (Zoopolis takes us into this -- sentience, selfhood, personhood) 
 +
:::*Stronger views: If basic rights include life and liberty, hard to see how you can have rights but not a right not to be eaten.
 +
:::*Weaker views: Trophic relationships matterPrey have rights, but not right not to be eaten.  Domesticated animals are domesticated prey.
  
:*(This account could easily incorporate the stories of the Montana farmers in the gripping "Lentil Underground" -- a good book group book.)
+
:*Less Traditional Arguments: Ecology and Co-evolution
 +
 
 +
::*Ecological or Sustainability arguments
 +
:::How inefficient is meat production?  (Simon Fairlie is taking us into this question.)
 +
:::Is some animal agriculture justified by waste avoidance?
 +
 
 +
::*Co-evolution arguments.
 +
:::*Weakness of "It's natural" arguments.
 +
:::*Stronger version:  Our very identity (and the identity of domesticated animals and pets) is tied to co-evolution with animals and agriculture itself.  (Recall Montanari.)
 +
:::*Problems with co-evolutionary arguments: Tend to be retrospective, but they do help explain resistance to ethically based dietary change.
 +
 
 +
===Donaldson & Klymika, "Introduction," Zoopolis===
 +
 
 +
:*animal advocacy at impasse.  did many goood things, but crowding out animals and eating them industrially (the "Eternal Treblinka") are big failures.
 +
:*Some, like Francione, oppose "ameliorist" positions because they can legitimate exploitation.
 +
:*Want a new moral framework: "on that connects the treatment of animals more directly to fundamental principles of liberal -democratic justice and human rights." 3
 +
:*Three typical positions:
 +
::*welfarist -- humans above animals.  can make use of them.
 +
::*ecological -- focused on health of ecosystems, not nec. standing of individuals in them.
 +
::*animal rights (ART) -- equal basic rights of life and liberty  (note this is a particular "strength level" of an ART thesis.  Could be stronger (a little) or weaker.  Problem: Why is ART so ineffective?  (People prefer the other two.) 
 +
 
 +
::*Their criticism of the AR movement:  too narrow, focused on universal negative rights (not to be owned, killed, confined, tortured, etc.)  Only applied to sentient animals. 
 +
::*Positive rights include: respecting habitat, designing human infrastructure in consideration of animals, rescue, obligations to dependent animals (like pets).  Also "relational duties" -- might have different obligations to animals we have domesticated then animals self-dom. or wild.
 +
::*(7) An odd effect of traditional ART is to want to separate humans and animals.  Francione accepts disappearance of domesticated animals. D&K argue against this vision.  We are in relationship with lots of animals as a matter of course.  human / animal relationship is not inherently suspect 10. 
 +
::*Another problem with traditional  ART:  overstates diff with ecologists.  AR advocates need to defend habitat.  Not always at odds with ecologists. 
 +
 
 +
::*Problems with relational approaches: focus on specific relationships (like companions) rather than a generalized theory, mistakenly posed as alternative to ART.  need for a relational theory that is "political"  Focusing on "citizenship" since that involves specific positive duties and responsibilities.  Some good analogies at p. 14.
 +
 
 +
===Fairlie, Simon.  Meat: An Extravagance, C1===
 +
 
 +
:*C1
 +
 
 +
:*Locates his argument: agrees with social justice arguments about diverting food from poor to rich meat eaters, but doesn't accept vegan conclusion that no meat eating is acceptable.  Only focused on environmental arguments, not other moral argument. 
 +
 
 +
:*Sees himself as agreeing with vegans about premises, but not conclusions.
 +
 
 +
:*C2
 +
 
 +
:*Interesting history to tell about nomadic cow/horse cultures and sedentary pig cultures and how they meet (ha!) in Europe.  (American culture is cow culture, perhaps because of European migration West.)
 +
:*Different efficiency ratios for pigs.  twice cows.  (ruminants vs. monogastrics)
 +
:*Detail: After Black Death, demand for field crops declines, use of fodder crops allowed more animal to be kept over winter. 
 +
:*Tracks emergence of "hog culture" in parts of US.  role of refrigeration favoring cows.  Pig meat can be cured more easily.
 +
 
 +
:*C3
 +
 
 +
:*Lays out the environmental case against meat. Agrees with it. Claims it's a problem for all luxuries. (Note argument strategy.)
 +
:*Environmental inefficiency of meat a concern prior to climate concerns.  50% of arable land in UK devoted to meat production. 
 +
:*Starts discussion of efficiency:
 +
::*Trophic levels -- energy loss at each level accounts for need for larger inputs.  p. 13 read: "By choosing to eat fish ...."
 +
::*"feed conversion" ratio -- based on percent of energy retained by animal from feed.
 +
::*parallel "land-take" ratio -- how frugally or extravagantly land can be used to produce food.  Expressed as in Singer ""plant food yield about ten times as much protein per acre as meat does"  (Long discussion of the 10:1 ratio initially suggests by Shelley!  Variation by animal/meat type. 
 +
::*turns to ag information to calculate feed conversion from expected grain needed to full weight for slaughter, then subtract non-meat part of the beast.  You get about 10:1 for a cow. 
 +
::*CAST vs. CIWF
 +
:::*Beef is only 20% of consumption.  Conversion ratios for other animals are better.  Comparing CIWF (vegan oriented analysis) and CAST (meat industry analysis).
 +
:::*Ultimately skeptical of CAST claim of little to no difference between animal / plant efficiency, but agrees with some of the reasons for lowering the ratios.
 +
::::*1. Nutritive value of meat, value of by products, values of fodder crops. 
 +
::::*2. Animals consume food humans can't/don't eat. 
 +
:::*Nutritional Value -- sketchy claim here 1.4 times plant.  But yields of basic nutrients should be factored in somehow along with pound for pound analysis.
 +
:::*By Products -- p. 22  Mention bone broth.  Value of byproducts in carcass declining due to competition from other sources.  value of the cow's skin, by weight, greater than beef. 
 +
:::*Crop yields.  Corn as a feed grain is more efficient than wheat and rice, though humans prefer wheat and rice as a staple.  Skeptical of some CAST claims here, but agrees that conversion ratio goes down if the fodder crop has a higher energy yield (or lower ag inputs like water). 
 +
:::*The Global Pig Bucket -- foods we can't eat (grass, straw, stalks), foods we won't eat (partially spoiled, residues of food processing, kitchen waste, slaughter waste).

Revision as of 20:27, 24 April 2018

APR 24: 26

Singer and Mason, "Ch 4, Meat and Milk Factories"

  • "Jake" refers to real interview subject. Book framed around several distinct diets of actual people and then journalism and ethics layered in.
  • Pigs
  • 90% fewer farms producing 103 million pigs, up from 69 million in 1975.
  • Pig farms environmental footprint dominated by excrement production. 4x human/day.
  • Pig interior life: smart, can express preferences, natural behaviors include socializing, forming groups, exploring enivronment. acreage ratios.
  • Evidence against sow stalls in EU investigation.
  • Interview with pig farmer, Wayne Bradley: small industrial, 10,000 pigs, (Implies large operation approach 700,000). Small examples of welfare: anesthesia for castration, limited nursing to accelerate production, continuous treatment for growth which cause side effects. Interesting interaction between a small industrial farmer and journalist. Note how tense it was and the allowance of an alternate ending from the farmer.
  • Milk
  • difficulty sourcing to particular dairy, even specialty brand. Cf. Pure Eire dairy [1]
  • Natural behaviors: form friendships, have emotional lives, experience pleasure on figuing something out. [2]
  • Lawnel Farm: about 900 cows, semi-industrial. cows indoors all the time, but not tied down, caves separated almost immediately, treatment of downers (
  • BST (from wiki page: rBST has not been allowed on the market in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Israel, or the European Union since 2000. Argentina also banned the use of rBST. The FDA, World Health Organization, and National Institutes of Health have independently stated that dairy products and meat from BST-treated cows are safe for human consumption. In the United States, public opinion led some manufacturers and retailers to market only milk that is rBST-free.)
  • Fate of male dairy cows. Ethics of veal production. Short life of confinement. Veal production down, but calves often made into pet food (digression on eat production for our carnivorous pets. yikes.) Now mostly raised for beef, veal in decline [3]
  • air pollution from dairy and cattle production.
  • Beef cows
  • Journalist buying calves: Pollan's is "534" - gets growth hormone implant, banned in EU. Problem of feeding a forager grain instead of grass. unnatural diet. "feedlot bloat"
  • History of regulation of meat products as cattle feed after mad cow outbreak. [4] FDA did ban "beef blood" and other animal products in feed. [5]
  • Feedlot runoff: evidence of environment damage in fish alteration in stream with runoff. "endocrine disruption" manure injection in fields.
  • Australian ranch: example of "happy meat" -- like "crowd cow"?
  • Ethics of slaughter - some improvement in first time success. also an area in which Temple Grandin has been influential. traditional slaughter methods, like kosher and halaal are touted as humane when performed properly.
  • Additional sources:
  • US Veal production: [6]
  • Local Organic certified grass fed dairy: [7]
  • Mad Cow Outbreak / Regulation timeline: [8]
  • The Secret Life of cows: [9]
  • Cow trauma: [10]


Estabrook, "Hogonomics"

  • Journalist on a quest to Flying Pigs Farm to discover diff bt $15.00 lb and $3.49 lb pork. comparison
  • FP farm: 750 pigs/yr, breeding rates, heritage pigs retain natural behaviors vs. industrial sows' life, living condition diff, labor diff,
  • Differences in slaughter and "kill fee". Saline injected pink meat. Implied value difference.

Some "Ethical Diets" Logic

  • Very traditional arguments: meat is toxic. Largely discredited, but see Lancet article on carcinogenicity. Health considerations support reduction of meat consumption, but not elimination.
  • Traditional arguments: Suffering and Rights
  • Suffering: Consider the welfarist position a baseline. "What sourcing choices does that exclude?" Then ask, "Does the animal suffer the loss of its life?"
  • Yes: Continuity of life has obvious value to both humans and animals.
  • Yes, but: You might agree with the premise of the Yes answer, but argue that "suffering from loss of life" is not suffering you are responsible for.
  • Yes and No: Depends upon the level of sentience. Continuum from plant sentience.
  • No: Categorical difference between the way a human "has a life" and the way an animal does.
  • Rights: Strength of rights position depends upon basis for asserting rights. (Zoopolis takes us into this -- sentience, selfhood, personhood)
  • Stronger views: If basic rights include life and liberty, hard to see how you can have rights but not a right not to be eaten.
  • Weaker views: Trophic relationships matter. Prey have rights, but not right not to be eaten. Domesticated animals are domesticated prey.
  • Less Traditional Arguments: Ecology and Co-evolution
  • Ecological or Sustainability arguments
How inefficient is meat production? (Simon Fairlie is taking us into this question.)
Is some animal agriculture justified by waste avoidance?
  • Co-evolution arguments.
  • Weakness of "It's natural" arguments.
  • Stronger version: Our very identity (and the identity of domesticated animals and pets) is tied to co-evolution with animals and agriculture itself. (Recall Montanari.)
  • Problems with co-evolutionary arguments: Tend to be retrospective, but they do help explain resistance to ethically based dietary change.

Donaldson & Klymika, "Introduction," Zoopolis

  • animal advocacy at impasse. did many goood things, but crowding out animals and eating them industrially (the "Eternal Treblinka") are big failures.
  • Some, like Francione, oppose "ameliorist" positions because they can legitimate exploitation.
  • Want a new moral framework: "on that connects the treatment of animals more directly to fundamental principles of liberal -democratic justice and human rights." 3
  • Three typical positions:
  • welfarist -- humans above animals. can make use of them.
  • ecological -- focused on health of ecosystems, not nec. standing of individuals in them.
  • animal rights (ART) -- equal basic rights of life and liberty (note this is a particular "strength level" of an ART thesis. Could be stronger (a little) or weaker. Problem: Why is ART so ineffective? (People prefer the other two.)
  • Their criticism of the AR movement: too narrow, focused on universal negative rights (not to be owned, killed, confined, tortured, etc.) Only applied to sentient animals.
  • Positive rights include: respecting habitat, designing human infrastructure in consideration of animals, rescue, obligations to dependent animals (like pets). Also "relational duties" -- might have different obligations to animals we have domesticated then animals self-dom. or wild.
  • (7) An odd effect of traditional ART is to want to separate humans and animals. Francione accepts disappearance of domesticated animals. D&K argue against this vision. We are in relationship with lots of animals as a matter of course. human / animal relationship is not inherently suspect 10.
  • Another problem with traditional ART: overstates diff with ecologists. AR advocates need to defend habitat. Not always at odds with ecologists.
  • Problems with relational approaches: focus on specific relationships (like companions) rather than a generalized theory, mistakenly posed as alternative to ART. need for a relational theory that is "political" Focusing on "citizenship" since that involves specific positive duties and responsibilities. Some good analogies at p. 14.

Fairlie, Simon. Meat: An Extravagance, C1

  • C1
  • Locates his argument: agrees with social justice arguments about diverting food from poor to rich meat eaters, but doesn't accept vegan conclusion that no meat eating is acceptable. Only focused on environmental arguments, not other moral argument.
  • Sees himself as agreeing with vegans about premises, but not conclusions.
  • C2
  • Interesting history to tell about nomadic cow/horse cultures and sedentary pig cultures and how they meet (ha!) in Europe. (American culture is cow culture, perhaps because of European migration West.)
  • Different efficiency ratios for pigs. twice cows. (ruminants vs. monogastrics)
  • Detail: After Black Death, demand for field crops declines, use of fodder crops allowed more animal to be kept over winter.
  • Tracks emergence of "hog culture" in parts of US. role of refrigeration favoring cows. Pig meat can be cured more easily.
  • C3
  • Lays out the environmental case against meat. Agrees with it. Claims it's a problem for all luxuries. (Note argument strategy.)
  • Environmental inefficiency of meat a concern prior to climate concerns. 50% of arable land in UK devoted to meat production.
  • Starts discussion of efficiency:
  • Trophic levels -- energy loss at each level accounts for need for larger inputs. p. 13 read: "By choosing to eat fish ...."
  • "feed conversion" ratio -- based on percent of energy retained by animal from feed.
  • parallel "land-take" ratio -- how frugally or extravagantly land can be used to produce food. Expressed as in Singer ""plant food yield about ten times as much protein per acre as meat does" (Long discussion of the 10:1 ratio initially suggests by Shelley! Variation by animal/meat type.
  • turns to ag information to calculate feed conversion from expected grain needed to full weight for slaughter, then subtract non-meat part of the beast. You get about 10:1 for a cow.
  • CAST vs. CIWF
  • Beef is only 20% of consumption. Conversion ratios for other animals are better. Comparing CIWF (vegan oriented analysis) and CAST (meat industry analysis).
  • Ultimately skeptical of CAST claim of little to no difference between animal / plant efficiency, but agrees with some of the reasons for lowering the ratios.
  • 1. Nutritive value of meat, value of by products, values of fodder crops.
  • 2. Animals consume food humans can't/don't eat.
  • Nutritional Value -- sketchy claim here 1.4 times plant. But yields of basic nutrients should be factored in somehow along with pound for pound analysis.
  • By Products -- p. 22 Mention bone broth. Value of byproducts in carcass declining due to competition from other sources. value of the cow's skin, by weight, greater than beef.
  • Crop yields. Corn as a feed grain is more efficient than wheat and rice, though humans prefer wheat and rice as a staple. Skeptical of some CAST claims here, but agrees that conversion ratio goes down if the fodder crop has a higher energy yield (or lower ag inputs like water).
  • The Global Pig Bucket -- foods we can't eat (grass, straw, stalks), foods we won't eat (partially spoiled, residues of food processing, kitchen waste, slaughter waste).