Are green vegetables green?

Consumption and sustainable and responsible diet tips daily to reduce energy and water consumption, waste ... Eat: preparations and recipes, find healthy food, seasonal and local conservation information food ...
MB
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 16
Registration: 27/06/13, 10:14

Are green vegetables green?




by MB » 07/07/14, 13:34

We often stress the energy inefficiency of meat: feeding a cow with corn is less efficient than feeding a human directly with the same corn. But green veggies and fruit don't sound great either, because it takes so much to make a meal. Thus, lettuce barely contains 130 kcal / kg, cucumber 150, tomato 180, etc. significantly less than pasta or rice (1000 kcal / kg), a steak (2000) or bread (2800). (Data: "Nutrition" by Sizer and Whitney.)

According to "How bad are bananas?", 1 kg of tomatoes generates 9 kg of CO2, 1 kg of rice generates 4 kg of CO2 equivalent (including methane), beef is at 18 kg / kg, and there are 1,25 kg per kg of bread. So tomatoes generate 60 kg of CO2 per 1000 kcal, beef 10 kg, rice 4 kg and bread 0.5 kg.
0 x
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963




by Ahmed » 07/07/14, 14:06

Let's be clear: food cannot be reduced to calories, this is all the more true since the excess calories in industrial foods are a real problem.

As for the carbon footprint of the production of various foods, it varies completely depending on the method of cultivation.
There is a world between industrial agriculture which destroys organic matter in soils by substituting petroleum inputs and agricultural practices inspired by permaculture thanks to which organic matter is stored in the soil ...
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
User avatar
chatelot16
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6960
Registration: 11/11/07, 17:33
Location: Angouleme
x 264




by chatelot16 » 07/07/14, 14:46

the calorie requirement depends on what you do

for certain the low amount of calories is a quality ... when you have to do physical work and endure the cold you need enough calories to run the machine!

we are not herbivores: it is not stupid to let the cows graze and eat the dairy product or the meat

there are problems in all foods ... so it is prudent to diversify as much as possible so as not to concentrate a single problem
0 x
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963




by Ahmed » 07/07/14, 15:35

We cannot reason only in terms of calories, otherwise it would be enough to "bottle-feed" with vodka! 8)

Breeding is not a heresy in itself when it allows the exploitation of mountain pastures or grassland areas, but we are no longer there with the model of American "feedlots" and its many avatars.
A significant reduction in the consumption of food of animal origin would have positive effects both in terms of public health and the environment.
Not to mention the invaluable moral gain there would be in reducing the instrumentalization of animals ...


In the XNUMXth century, Henry VI, (which was a bit the equivalent of Chirac of the time :P), would have declared: "I want that each family can put the hen in the pot on Sunday".
Fortunately it was only empty words, otherwise it would have been annoying shortages!
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
User avatar
Did67
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 20362
Registration: 20/01/08, 16:34
Location: Alsace
x 8685




by Did67 » 07/07/14, 15:52

Breeding is all the less a heresy if it is a question of ruminants, the only ones capable of enhancing cellulose, thanks to the bacterial flora in their rumen ... This is how straw becomes valuable proteins (and some "bad fats" too)

It is therefore an excellent collector / converter of herbs - including dry and strawy herbs - of which the most austere of humans (a Himba, a Masai, a Touareg ...) would find it difficult to feed ...

It is the excesses that pose the problems. Excess in our eating habits. Excess of "production systems" ...

And if I may allow myself, unfortunately, there is almost nothing more than excess!

[For example, my tomato plants, cultivated in the open fields, without tillage, without fertilizer, without treatment certainly do not have the results mentioned above - which would probably be correct for stomata produced in greenhouses, irrigated. "under an infusion", fertilized, treated, transported from distant lands ...]. But I don't eat it at Christmas, nor at Easter !!! I'm going to start my "cure" shortly, stuff it up, then get fed up, make jars of sauce ...]
0 x
User avatar
chatelot16
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6960
Registration: 11/11/07, 17:33
Location: Angouleme
x 264




by chatelot16 » 07/07/14, 15:58

the exploitation of farm animals is not necessarily the worst

and men? they are often treated less than animals

even if it is sad to know that all the cows of a breeding will end up at the slaughterhouse, at least they are treated well to make good meats ... better treated than the men of which we speak in the other subject
https://www.econologie.com/forums/systeme-an ... 13354.html

I'm talking about breeding that I know near my home ... of course there are others that are painful

but we must still see where the priorities are: we see in the world more badly treated man than animals ... and often when animals are mistreated it is because of the same misery that men undergo
0 x
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963




by Ahmed » 07/07/14, 16:28

And, if I may allow myself, unfortunately, there is almost nothing more than excess!

You can afford, you can! 8)
Excess is indeed not an "accident" attributable to bad practices or to the greed of a few, which it would suffice to reform by some simple regulation, no, it is consubstantial with the economy which does not can subsist without growth; but what can growth lead to if not to excess?
However, excess, which has a misleading moral connotation, is not the cause, but the consequence of the acts of agents, oblivious to the system that manipulates them ...

Robert Kurz, recently disappeared, wrote in his "Black book of capitalism", captioned" Farewell song to the market economy. ":
The current situation takes on the appearance of a crazy fairy tale, where the absurd seems normal while what was taken for granted becomes completely incomprehensible: as if struck by a bad fate, the social conscience has completely repressed what kills the eyes and goes really without saying. Despite the fact, which is quite glaringly obvious, that even a little more reasonable use of common resources is now absolutely irreconcilable with the capitalist form, we continue to debate only “ concepts ”and approaches that precisely presuppose this form. "
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963




by Ahmed » 07/07/14, 16:37

Chatelot, you write:
the use of farm animals is not necessarily the worst.
and men? they are often treated less than animals.

As you rightly note at the end of your message, the cause of the instrumentalization of animals as well as that of men has the same origin, which is why acting on one necessarily means acting on the other (if the 'we can say!).
Gandhi affirmed that we recognize the greatness of a civilization by the way animals are treated there ... No comment!
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491




by Janic » 07/07/14, 17:09

Hello
loose
Let's be clear: food cannot be reduced to calories, this is all the more true since the excess calories in industrial foods are a real problem.
The concept of calories, so widely used, is misused. A gasoline tank (containing millions of potential calories is cold, as is a gas cylinder, coal or wood.
Then, as for the fuels mentioned above, each food constituent has a different calorific potential. this is called the caloric quantity (or value) of a product which is ultimately nothing but combustion waste. But, like all fuels, what matters is the final efficiency: for example 30% for an internal combustion engine. On the organic level it is the same thing in more complex. Indeed, the absorption of a food does not translate into a total assimilation (otherwise we would no longer have a bowel movement) but partial according to its composition first, its chewing and its salivary mixture (and not a blow of red to pass) its raw or cooked form, its load of products with high assimilation waste and therefore one person will be able to absorb half of another whose mechanisms: absorption, chewing, stomach bolus (acid-base balance possibly), intestinal assimilation and duration of transit will be in better condition, often linked to age as well (independently of all pharmaceutical products absorbed from a certain age by the "old" and less old for that matter)

we are not herbivores: it is not stupid to let the cows graze and eat the dairy product or the meat.
That's right, we are not herbivores, but not carnivores, biologically and anatomically speaking, either. To regard grazing as stupidity because we are not herbivores is no more so than to consume other products physiologically as unsuitable as dairy products or meat. It is to confuse cultural eating habits and the biological and anatomical constitution (which one puts forward however concerning these herbivores). But humans are not without a contradiction!

In the XNUMXth century, Henry VI, (who was somewhat the equivalent of the Chirac at the time), would have declared: "I want every family to be able to put the hen in the pot on Sunday".
To put in context! Henri IV was, before his access to the throne, a noble earthman knowing the manners of his time which consisted in cheerfully drawing from the breeding and fields to grant himself an abundance of victuals, while the people were in scarcity. The situation being even more difficult in the cities. His wishful thinking, in this case, rather expressed a wish (to leave to the peasants and less favored, the possibility of making like their lords and masters) a communism before the hour! Nothing dietetic in there of course!

It is the excesses that pose the problems. Excess in our eating habits. Excess of "production systems" ...
Obviously excess can become harmful. but who defines what is an excess, when a product is not adapted anyway? Campaigns against excess alcoholic drinks do not refer to the poison itself, but to its reduction only thus preserving a whole profession and consumer voters). No campaign has used the same language for cigarettes, for example: one cigarette okay, three hello damage »Because the interests at stake were much less (in addition the State itself was the biggest dealer of the product) which put it in an overhang, vis-à-vis the SS.

even if it is sad to know that all the cows of a breeding will end up at the slaughterhouse, at least they are well treated to make good meats ...
What a strange language! To say that one condemned to death treated well is better than another condemned to death less treated. I suppose that those condemned to death would not be of the same opinion since more than a preferential treatment or not, it is their life, to which each one holds, which is most important. (but we obviously do not ask their opinion to the slaughtered animals, nor to the bulls massacred in the arenas as in the time of the Roman circus games.)
And there I know that I am going to shock some with a Goldwin point, but if we had given the choice to the prisoners in the death camps between a preferential treatment and death or a less good treatment and life, their choice would not have taken a photo.

Gandhi affirmed that one recognizes the greatness of a civilization by the way animals are treated there ... No comment! and in order to harmonize his words and his actions he became a vegetarian. May men understand that one cannot reject the notion of violence while at the same time justifying it.
0 x
User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6856
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 749




by sen-no-sen » 07/07/14, 17:27

Janic wrote:And there I know that I will shock some with a Goldwin point, (...)


It's point Godwin!

MB wrote:
But green vegetables and fruit don't sound great either, because it takes so much to make a meal. Thus, lettuce barely contains 130 kcal / kg, cucumber 150, tomato 180, etc. significantly less than pasta or rice (1000 kcal / kg), a steak (2000) or bread (2800). (Data: "Nutrition" by Sizer and Whitney.)


To make a valid balance, you have to compare the land area necessary to have an equivalent amount of calories ... you need for example 5.000m² (1/2 ha) of cultivable land to produce 70 kg of beef for the same area, this gives 10.000 kg of potatoes!
15.000 liters of water to make 1 kg of beef and 800 liters of water to 1 kg of wheat ...
To give an order of magnitude, a Beef can give 200 meals against 15 meals with the cereals it has eaten!

The advantage clearly goes to plants!
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Sustainable consumption: responsible consumption, diet tips and tricks"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 140 guests