Locally, all the beef in my area is grass fed. All unnatural pastures were created as a byproduct of the logging industry, not for cattle. It’s butchered and stays local. I must guess our beef here is that outlier at 9 kg CO2 equivalent per kg….or better.
I also must assume they give no value to the rest of the carcass in their calculations…bone meal, tallow, etc are also valuable commodities not accounted for here.

The biggest issue with food production is the number of mouths to feed. We about 8 billion today and rising. The maximum number that can be supported is estimated to be between 8 and 10 billion, but the maximum that can be sustained naturally without depletion of essential resources is only 1.5 billion, assuming they use the same resources per capita.
To actually be sustainable as a species, we need to eliminate over 80% of the population AND adopt far less destructive behaviors.
Ain’t gonna happen. Start making your chain mail dresses and shoulder pads now, it’s almost time for Thunderdome.

Sources for the 8-10 billion & 1.5 billion figures? I'm just both fascinated & concerned about how the scientists come up with those numbers and what tech & better farming can do.

Yeah I agree the human population can't just grow & grow. But it seems the only way to do that is 1) war & 2) high cost of living has worked so far. Diseases used to be a fair equalizer as well, but with advanced R&D, even a pandemic like what we have is able to prevent mass casuality rates of the past.

A 2012 United Nations report summarized 65 different estimated maximum sustainable population size and the most common estimate was 8 billion. Advocates of reduced population often put forward much lower numbers. Paul R. Ehrlich stated in 2018 that the optimum population is between 1.5 and 2 billion

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainable_population

Since we are at or near 8 billion and are far from sustainable, haven’t been for over 50 years, I think the 1.5 number is far more realistic, maybe even high. I think the 8 billion estimates assume international cooperation, constant advances in farming tech with constantly increasing yields (that aren’t happening), and don’t account for climate change disrupting supply chains and production at various levels….so wishful thinking.

War sucks for population control. It’s messy, expensive, destructive of both infrastructure and ecology, and just crap at killing meaningful numbers. We need to reduce by billions, the worst war killed a few million and destroyed much of Europe. A war that kills 1000 times more people….yikes. Forget global warming, hello planetary disintegration.

The only acceptable method IMO is quit having children, then you don’t kill anyone to achieve sustainability. For some idiotic reason, average people find the idea of not having excess children horrific and totally out of the question, but the idea of starving their children to death seems to garner a “shit happens”.

Agreed, we need something like an airborne infectious prion where there could be no vaccine, no sterilization, no escape…..only that would wipe out everyone so maybe not that.

Moving this video to eric3579's personal queue. It failed to receive enough votes to get sifted up to the front page within 2 days.