From: viking@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson)
Subject: Re: Combine'd' laziness
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 01:59:22 GMT

In <C168w2.20C@wpg.com> russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) writes:

>>    No chance in hell.  The air traffic in this country alone 
>> burns more than what livestock production could hope to burn, let 
>> alone the cars in the streets, the trucks on the highways, etc...

>Are you referring to the air traffic that's involved in transporting
>the executives of hamburger chains?  Or the cars in the streets used
>by people who produce or sell meat?  Or the trucks that are used to
>haul livestock or livestock parts over the open road?

	Yes, as well as all other people transporting themselves
around the country.

>After considering the materials used to reserve and pump water, 
>the materials used to produce and transport fertilizer and 
>herbicide, the materials used to grow and transport fodder, etc, 
>etc, how much raw material is consumed in this country to produce 
>livestock?  By contrast, how much material is consumed by
>air traffic?

	So now it's not fuel, it's materials?  Consider that a decent
jet will weigh a few tons, most of which is aluminum.  Note the
incredibly energy demands smelting aluminum takes.  Refer to the
2/3hp pump and the 2-amp electric fencer it takes to raise cattle.
Just as you have above, I'm comparing apples and oranges.  Still, it's
amazing to note that somehow, you expect a large portion of agriculture
to simple dry up and go away if cattle weren't eaten.  I can assure you
that it won't happen, since there is profit to be made.

>You're not counting the water that's required for purposes other
>than drinking.  For example, you're not including water required
>to produce grain and fodder.  Why not?

	Because here, that water is called rainfall.

>Rather than argue for the sake of arguing, why don't you give us
>the figures that you consider to be correct.  Be sure to post your 
>sources.

	Source: Dan Sorenson.  "A study on cows killed by eating
green alfalfa."  Soon to be on a bookstand near you as soon as I get
an advance to make it worth my time to write it.  I point out
example of where the theories and facts don't work in real life, and
you expect me to trudge through the library to find somebody else
who has made a study of it?  Frankly, it's not worth my time.

>Gossip?   Would you consider data published in _Science_ to be
>"gossip"?

	Cold Fusion.  What would you call it?

>Again, it takes 4.8 kilos of grain (not to mention fodder) to 
>produce one kilo of edible beef in the US.  And the same kilo of 
>beef requires approximately 3000 liters of water (uh, not just 
>drinking water, Dan).  By comparison, how much grain and water is 
>required to produce a can of beer?  

	I dunno.  Want to call Budweiser and find out?  In my
homebrew, it takes a good six gallons of water to produce five
gallons of wort (evaporation).  Figure a good twenty gallons of
water to sparge the grains, and then whatever it takes to grow
the grains originally (rainfall in Iowa, eight billion gallons
in California).  Let's see, 26/5 = 5.25 gallons water/gallon
brew without including the water to grow the grains.  Let's not
forget water for cleaning, rinsing, and cooling the boiler walls
in a decent operation.  Since the grain takes the same amount
no matter what it's fed to, I don't see what your point is.  If
you're out to save water, you might try to track down where it's
taking 2960 liters of water for the grain the cow eats.

	Or is this a red herring?  It might take 2960 liters of
water to make the grain, if you think solely of rainfall over
the area and somehow assume you could have captured all if it for
another purpose, but since it can't be done what's the point?

< Dan Sorenson, DoD #1066 z1dan@exnet.iastate.edu viking@iastate.edu >
<  ISU only censors what I read, not what I say.  Don't blame them.  >
<     USENET: Post to exotic, distant machines.  Meet exciting,      >
<                 unusual people.  And flame them.                   >


Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals