Some counterarguments to @GeorgeMonbiot’s 13 tweets with which he tries to combat concerns about the ‘new fermentation technologies’ underlying the latest form of alt-meat products 🧵

https://twitter.com/GeorgeMonbiot/status/1826512424758841390

1. But first the key problem he didn’t mention. These products are vast consumers of precious generated electricity. George has claimed they use ~17kWh/kg protein. The real figure is well over 60kWh/kg - ie. untenable as a sustainable mass food. More here chrissmaje.com/2024/08/newsfl…

I said I’d respond to @JMarkDodds on key issues @GeorgeMonbiot ducks in #Regenesis so here goes (then I'm done with this!): energy futures; urban futures; political econ/ecol of food, hunger & land; default livestock. Not necessarily saying he doesn’t mention them... 1/5

https://twitter.com/JMarkDodds/status/1766031095496130808

...but he ducks the key issues. IMO #Regenesis is copiously referenced, but not well researched

Re transparency & mistakes, I review this re George’s claim that bacterial protein could feed humanity with an 11% increase in electricity demand here – 2/5chrissmaje.com/wp-content/upl…

I’m reposting my remarks on @GeorgeMonbiot’s energy data as an updated 🧵 after another read of his source. IMO this is important – I think George’s figure is wrong & this has implications for the feasibility of the ‘farm-free’ future he foretells in #Regenesis 1/16 George finally gave his source for his 16.7 kWh/kg bacterial protein claim as this paper (‘the Sillman study’): 2/16sciencedirect.com/science/articl…

At last @GeorgeMonbiot has replied to Qs about his energy figures for bacterial protein production – but he’s merely reiterated what he said in his book. He claims an energy cost of 16.7 kWh/kg – huge relative to existing agricultural alternatives & probably non-viable... 1/4 as mass food tech. But I think his figure is incorrect. I calculated it at 65.3 kWh/kg – nearly 4x higher (& not including important lifecycle costs). My calculations are drawn from a peer-reviewed study with publicly available data, whereas George’s seem to be from... 2/4

Interesting review of my book #NOtoFarmFree from @Jeremy_Williams. A few remarks:

Maybe it’s premature to dismiss a technology that "doesn’t exist yet beyond a single experimental company" but time isn't on our side. What’s clear is that this technology will *always* use... 1/6

https://twitter.com/Jeremy_Williams/status/1701203087908618609

...more supplied primary energy than cultivated plants

Given that per acre yields from agroecological production aren't less than from industrial production, there’s no need to ‘prove’ the former can feed the world... 2/6

My writing on ag localism to meet present crises is influenced by ecosocialism but more by distributism, civic republicanism & ag populism. I’ve had good engagement from ppl on the left – we share much – but also some nonsense. Long 🧵to try to lay out overlaps & divergences 1/27 Basic structure of many small farm societies of the past & (I suspect) the future: households usually comprising a small kin-related group as unit of production & consumption with exclusive access to a small area of land, set within wider commons & community relationships 2/27

A thread on farming livestock in answer to @helioscomm regarding @GeorgeMonbiot's arguments:

1. With cheap & abundant (fossil) energy for fertilizer, traction etc, plants can produce more protein & energy per acre or per energy input than livestock... 2. But without cheap energy you usually need to build fertility with grass/legume leys & rotate between ley & cropland. In this situation, livestock are all but essential - and it’s not meaningful to ask whether plants or livestock produce the most nutrition per unit input...

Hmm, I find this problematic 🧵

https://twitter.com/NiranjanAjit/status/1387373159435829249

1/10 The forces driving potential 'collapse' aren’t only climate related, but are independently driven by political economy, energy, water, soils, ecosystems etc.