You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
5 points
*

So what’s a better study or metastudy? The actual results, aside from poultry being weirdly low-resource, seem about right when you consider the way energy usually moves through food webs.

That’s “Life Cycle Assessment”, for anyone else that’s wondering.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

So what’s a better study or metastudy?

personally, i believe that attempts to quantify any complex system into discrete metrics is likely to have blind spots and misunderstand the system as a whole. i think that if you are concerned about the environmental impacts of agriculture, the correct approach is to evaluate each operation on its own and try to optimize it for inputs and outputs.

permalink
report
parent
reply

@commie @CanadaPlus dude, this ain’t no hill you need to die on …

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Thanks? I didn’t think there was any dying yet. I wasn’t even arguing there, professionals are often happy to point you to their preferred sources.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

You can probably see how actual statistics are useful for policy or public discussion, though, right?

We aren’t going to fix any big picture problem by leaving it up to the businesses pedaling whichever product. Like, you wouldn’t apply that to an oil well, would you?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I can see how politicians and bureaucrats would prefer statistics, but I don’t believe that’s a good source for public policy myself, no.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

The actual results

are meaningless, because they misuse the source data.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Data is Beautiful

!dataisbeautiful@mander.xyz

Create post

Be respectful

Community stats

  • 1.4K

    Monthly active users

  • 116

    Posts

  • 1.8K

    Comments