A point that comes up often: "grazing land is not suitable for growing crops".
True. Two-thirds of grazing land is not great for crops.
But that's okay: more plant-based diets tend to need *less* cropland, not more.
How can this be true? 👇
2/
It's because so much of our cropland is used to produce feed for animals.
Less than half of the world's cereals go directly to human food.
3/
In some countries, very little cereals go to human food.
Less than a third in many European countries. Only 10% in the US.
4/
Of course, crops are converted to meat and dairy. But most calories and protein is lost in the process.
Small animals tend to be more efficient, hence why chicken & fish are better options.
5/
Changes in diets can free up lots of land. We can regrow forests, wild grasslands & let natural ecosystems restore
We'll have a follow-up article on carbon opportunity costs soon. But if you want to see the research on this, @matthewhayek's research here: nature.com/articles/s4189…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
"China uses more cement in 3 years than the US did in the entire 20th century".
I see this claim a lot & was curious if it stacked up against data on CO₂ emissions from cement.
So, some more back-of-the-envelope fact-checking below ↓↓
Spoiler: yes, seems to stack up
I'm using annual data on CO₂ from cement prod from @gcarbonproject & CDIAC. You can explore, compare countries, download from our CO₂ data explorer here: rb.gy/szuwvo
My calcs:
CO₂ from cement in USA for entire 20th century = 1838 million tonnes
Annual CO₂ from cement in China (2018) = 781 million tonnes
China emits same in 2.4 years as US in 20th century.
The study highlights a few key points:
– most of our soils have a 'lifespan' much greater than this.
– poor soil quality is still a problem in some areas
– we can increase this soil quality with proper management practices.
This is one of the key paragraphs 👇
Many have tried to find a credible source for the "only 60 years of harvest left" claim, and struggled to find one.
Half of the world's habitable land is used for agriculture. Three-quarters for livestock.
The paper looks at how much carbon we could sequester if everyone adopted the EAT-Lancet diet (which has some meat & dairy, but much less than the current Western diet) or a vegan diet.
It estimates that through ecosystem restoration we could sequester the equivalent of 9 years of fossil fuel emissions by 2050 on the EAT-Lancet diet.
Or 16 years of fossil emissions on the vegan diet.