Author Topic: Is halloumi preferable to meat when it comes to health and climate change?  (Read 2988 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online bachfiend

  • Not Any Kind of Moderator
  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2255
Re: Is halloumi preferable to meat when it comes to health and climate change?
« Reply #60 on: February 02, 2019, 09:48:02 PM »
What do you mean by ‘outback?’  The only use I know of it is the Australian desert and semidesert, which could never been transformed into a lush garden with increased water.  The soil is just too poor, requirering a lot of fertiliser to grow crops.


Yes. The only reason the soil is poor is because too little grows there. The only reason too little grows there is because there's not enough water.

To turn the outback into a lush garden, just add water.  Growth would start with brush and grasses that would feed ruminants, and gradually build up top soil to develop pastures.

But, as you say, with fertilizer, you could grow crops right away. Fertilizer is easy.

Another reason why the Australian soil is so poor is that Australia is a very old continent.  All the nutrients, and the soil itself, has been washed out over the millennia.  The Sahara was fertile thousands of years ago.  Australia hasn’t been fertile for tens of thousands of years.

We’ve got plenty of water in the Ord River scheme in the Kimberly.  Even after decades and a lot of investment it’s still not paying its way.  It’s a great place for a holiday though.
Gebt ihr ihr ihr Buch zurück?

Offline CarbShark

  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 12233
Re: Is halloumi preferable to meat when it comes to health and climate change?
« Reply #61 on: February 02, 2019, 09:56:22 PM »
What do you mean by ‘outback?’  The only use I know of it is the Australian desert and semidesert, which could never been transformed into a lush garden with increased water.  The soil is just too poor, requirering a lot of fertiliser to grow crops.


Yes. The only reason the soil is poor is because too little grows there. The only reason too little grows there is because there's not enough water.

To turn the outback into a lush garden, just add water.  Growth would start with brush and grasses that would feed ruminants, and gradually build up top soil to develop pastures.

But, as you say, with fertilizer, you could grow crops right away. Fertilizer is easy.

Another reason why the Australian soil is so poor is that Australia is a very old continent.  All the nutrients, and the soil itself, has been washed out over the millennia.  The Sahara was fertile thousands of years ago.  Australia hasn’t been fertile for tens of thousands of years.

We’ve got plenty of water in the Ord River scheme in the Kimberly.  Even after decades and a lot of investment it’s still not paying its way.  It’s a great place for a holiday though.

They're growing a lot of food now in the Kimberley, thanks to that scheme. Nothing wrong with that soil.
and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just someone who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

Online bachfiend

  • Not Any Kind of Moderator
  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2255
Re: Is halloumi preferable to meat when it comes to health and climate change?
« Reply #62 on: February 02, 2019, 10:30:30 PM »
What do you mean by ‘outback?’  The only use I know of it is the Australian desert and semidesert, which could never been transformed into a lush garden with increased water.  The soil is just too poor, requirering a lot of fertiliser to grow crops.


Yes. The only reason the soil is poor is because too little grows there. The only reason too little grows there is because there's not enough water.

To turn the outback into a lush garden, just add water.  Growth would start with brush and grasses that would feed ruminants, and gradually build up top soil to develop pastures.

But, as you say, with fertilizer, you could grow crops right away. Fertilizer is easy.

Another reason why the Australian soil is so poor is that Australia is a very old continent.  All the nutrients, and the soil itself, has been washed out over the millennia.  The Sahara was fertile thousands of years ago.  Australia hasn’t been fertile for tens of thousands of years.

We’ve got plenty of water in the Ord River scheme in the Kimberly.  Even after decades and a lot of investment it’s still not paying its way.  It’s a great place for a holiday though.

They're growing a lot of food now in the Kimberley, thanks to that scheme. Nothing wrong with that soil.

No, it isn’t.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ord_River
Gebt ihr ihr ihr Buch zurück?

Offline CarbShark

  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 12233
Re: Is halloumi preferable to meat when it comes to health and climate change?
« Reply #63 on: February 02, 2019, 11:41:21 PM »
That page supports my argument. They’re growing food on once fallow land. The food may not pay for construction of the dam but that is not relevant. It’s a government project, not a business. It doesn’t have to show a profit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just someone who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

Online bachfiend

  • Not Any Kind of Moderator
  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2255
Re: Is halloumi preferable to meat when it comes to health and climate change?
« Reply #64 on: February 03, 2019, 04:48:17 AM »
That page supports my argument. They’re growing food on once fallow land. The food may not pay for construction of the dam but that is not relevant. It’s a government project, not a business. It doesn’t have to show a profit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Very little at enormous cost, and a far way from even breaking even.  And the most profitable crop isn’t food, it’s sandlewood.
Gebt ihr ihr ihr Buch zurück?

Offline 2397

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 3026
Re: Is halloumi preferable to meat when it comes to health and climate change?
« Reply #65 on: February 03, 2019, 07:45:53 AM »
None of this is relevant to the question of how to feed seven and a half billion people in a manner that does not turn the Earth into Venus.

We actually have a pretty large capacity to grow more food. The real issue is making it economical to distribute globally.

To key expand global agricultural production is water. The difference between arable and non-arable land is water. Nothing else.

If want to save the world (I'm talking to you, Elon Musk) you would do two things: Develop an efficient large scale desalination system to turn seawater into fresh water; Use your boring machines to cut 10s of thousands of miles of tunnels to carry pumped water throughout the west (in the US) and the same in other dry areas throughout the world. 

The outback could become a lush garden.

I thought that not destroying civilization while we produce all this food was the key point Daniel was making. It doesn't matter how much more food we could produce, unless we can do it while polluting less in total than we do today.

Offline daniel1948

  • Happy Man in a Boat
  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 9308
  • I'd rather be paddling
Re: Is halloumi preferable to meat when it comes to health and climate change?
« Reply #66 on: February 03, 2019, 09:27:52 AM »
None of this is relevant to the question of how to feed seven and a half billion people in a manner that does not turn the Earth into Venus.

We actually have a pretty large capacity to grow more food. The real issue is making it economical to distribute globally.

To key expand global agricultural production is water. The difference between arable and non-arable land is water. Nothing else.

If want to save the world (I'm talking to you, Elon Musk) you would do two things: Develop an efficient large scale desalination system to turn seawater into fresh water; Use your boring machines to cut 10s of thousands of miles of tunnels to carry pumped water throughout the west (in the US) and the same in other dry areas throughout the world. 

The outback could become a lush garden.

I thought that not destroying civilization while we produce all this food was the key point Daniel was making. It doesn't matter how much more food we could produce, unless we can do it while polluting less in total than we do today.

Exactly. Thank you.
Daniel
----------------
"Anyone who has ever looked into the glazed eyes of a soldier dying on the battlefield will think long and hard before starting a war."
-- Otto von Bismarck