forums energies: society, ecology and clean technologies

The majority of grain in the world is not consumed by humans.

The Economist newspaper did a series of infographics on cereal utilization around the world with 2019 data:

- Of the almost 3 billion tonnes produced in 2019, less than half (46%) is directly consumed by humans

- For the rest, a third (34%) is used in breeding as animal feed, 9% as biofuel, 2,5% as future seeds and the rest (8%) is lost in industrial processes.

- Since 2010, the use of cereals in the world has increased by 20 kg per person per year. Direct human consumption has not increased, while 17 kg of the 20 increase is attributed to livestock. 17kg of wheat provide 56 calories, enough to produce 000 baguettes.

- Yet animals are not effective: they waste between 60 and 97% of the calories from the cereals they are given, this is due to the intrinsic inefficiency of vegetable-to-meat conversion. So the best student is whole milk which wastes "only" 60% of the calories from cereals, while the worst student is cattle farming, which wastes 97% of the calories from cereals.

These figures are 78% for eggs, 88% for chickens and 90% for pigs.

"If the 750 million pigs were a country, it would be the largest grain consumer by far, consuming as much grain as 2 billion people."

The authors of the article conclude: "Ironically, one of the most effective ways for individual consumers to address the world's grain shortage is to eat more grains, at the expense of meat."

No kidding ?









source: https://www.economist.com/graphic-detai ... -by-humans

Christophe wrote:

The authors of the article conclude: "Ironically, one of the most effective ways for individual consumers to address the world's grain shortage is to eat more grains, at the expense of meat."

No kidding ?

Yes indeed because it will not have escaped you except the volumes produced and the efficiency of transformation (vegetables into meat).
Almost all of these numbers are wrong.

Some examples:
— a balanced food bowl, does not require that much protein, meat once a week and think about fish!
— Induran, which won the Tour de France 5 times, consumed only 20 to 30g of freshly ground cereals per day!
— eggs are champions in all categories, because it should not be seen in terms of “calories” but of complete intake, lives. etc
— we regularly see that humans need 45 to 60% carbohydrates, it's madness: https://sante.lefigaro.fr/fiches-7
— the losses should be greater... So little loss is the proof of a gigantic mass of devitalized food!

Ah... what are we talking about other than volumes and conversion efficiency?

Well you should send a corrective email to the economist's editorial staff then

No, there are too many idiots. We should start by stopping the training of experts who only know their branch: economists who do not know agriculture, farmers who are not health specialists, dieticians who do not know the nutritional requirements of the WHO in contributions in International Units, doctors who only do a day or two of dietetics, etc...

And above all, don't give them ideas

Ladle, depending on type of activity and customs: we still consume 10 to 20x too many carbohydrates / proteins (cereals are part of it)

(I edited)

You edited to divert the subject

Uh no, why would I do that...!
I never changed my rhetoric.
A oua-oua is faithful at least

Obamot wrote:Yes indeed because it will not have escaped you except the volumes produced and the efficiency of transformation (vegetables into meat).
Almost all of these numbers are wrong.

Some examples:
— a balanced food bowl, does not require that much protein, meat once a week and think about fish!
— Induran, which won the Tour de France 5 times, consumed only 20 to 30g of freshly ground cereals per day!
— eggs are champions in all categories, because it should not be seen in terms of “calories” but of complete intake, lives. etc
— we regularly see that humans need 45 to 60% carbohydrates, it's madness: https://sante.lefigaro.fr/fiches-7
— the losses should be greater... So little loss is the proof of a gigantic mass of devitalized food!

Last edited by Obamot on 26/07/22, 22:31 PM, edited 4 times.

Edit 4 times to write 5 off-topic bullshit ("Almost all of these numbers are wrong., which ones are wrong?), it does seem like a record!

Yeah that's kinda the idea!

https://sante.lefigaro.fr/fiches-7
this kind of article means everything and nothing like all the abstract averages considering that beyond that there is lack, excess and other nonsense. It is, by comparison, like establishing an average of height or average age, even of weight because too many factors in constant fluctuation, are as, even more important than abstract average figures.
But it remains true that human consumption first passing through animal consumption is an enormous waste, all the more so with an increase in the human population where this waste is made to the detriment of poor people (in food).

Christophe wrote:

sicetaitsimple wrote:

Obamot wrote:Yes indeed because it will not have escaped you except the volumes produced and the efficiency of transformation (vegetables into meat).
Almost all of these numbers are wrong.

Some examples:
— a balanced food bowl, does not require that much protein, meat once a week and think about fish!
— Induran, which won the Tour de France 5 times, consumed only 20 to 30g of freshly ground cereals per day!
— eggs are champions in all categories, because it should not be seen in terms of “calories” but of complete intake, lives. etc
— we regularly see that humans need 45 to 60% carbohydrates, it's madness: https://sante.lefigaro.fr/fiches-7
— the losses should be greater... So little loss is the proof of a gigantic mass of devitalized food!

Last edited by Obamot on 26/07/22, 22:31 PM, edited 4 times.

Edit 4 times to write 5 off-topic bullshit ("Almost all of these numbers are wrong., which ones are wrong?), it does seem like a record!

Yeah that's kinda the idea!

And that takes us where this trial of intent, while everything in my post reflects benevolence...

Well I'll tell you, I bothered to put quotes and post links. Also, I was known to keep editing my posts after I published them, overcoming the gymnastic difficulty that Janic faced.

So I announce that I will make "raw" posts without quotes, comments, links, TER_MI_NÉ...


...no but, I'm nice, kind, patient and I'm mobbed... and I should still get pissed off...? What next

...justify myself? And then who else? No need, I know what I'm worth, I'm a cool guy, well it's over: I don't care

EBA...