Are all animal lives equal? I would think you need to weight for sapience or conscientiousness or whatever. By the metric of “lives taken of any kind per calorie” worms are a much worse form of of animal food, even though they have a very primitive nervous system.
I don’t think so, but with a difference of 2 orders of magnitude between how many cows and chickens you would kill per calorie, the numbers are most important in this case, I think.
Not necessarily, at least if you’re considering it on a negative basis. Allan Savory’s work suggests raising cows (or similar animals) has a net positive impact if done properly in the correct regions.
(Not to mention there are more parts of the world suited to grazing than to farm agriculture.)
Are all animal lives equal? I would think you need to weight for sapience or conscientiousness or whatever. By the metric of “lives taken of any kind per calorie” worms are a much worse form of of animal food, even though they have a very primitive nervous system.
I don’t think so, but with a difference of 2 orders of magnitude between how many cows and chickens you would kill per calorie, the numbers are most important in this case, I think.
If you’re concerned about eating meat for ecological reasons, raising cows has more impact on the environment on a per-calorie basis.
Not necessarily, at least if you’re considering it on a negative basis. Allan Savory’s work suggests raising cows (or similar animals) has a net positive impact if done properly in the correct regions.
(Not to mention there are more parts of the world suited to grazing than to farm agriculture.)
Does he consider the climate change implications of methane from cows in that analysis?