Dealing with the Externalities of Our Major Industries

Dealing with the Externalities of Our Major IndustriesA reader commented on my post In Choosing Among Various Approaches to Energy, Politics Is a Very Big Deal that I support political action involving an ideological/moral campaign to prevent the eating of red meat.

I suppose that would be a decent idea, but I know that most people, Westerners in particular, are very locked in to this aspect of their diet, and thus there is a limit to which such a campaign would be successful.

Having said that, here’s something that I believe is important and eminently fair.  In animal husbandry, as in electricity generation and all other forms of commerce, we need to internalize the externalities. Someone needs to cover the costs of dealing with the methane, the manure, the environmental damage and loss of biodiversity associated with clear-cutting the rainforests, the increase in heart disease and myriad other health issues, and rendering millions of children obese and malnourished.

If you ask yourself how McDonald’s became a company with a market cap of $107 billion, your answer needs to include the fact that all these externalities are passed along for other people to bear. That’s not fair, just as it’s not fair that the energy industry uses our atmosphere as its waste dump.

FWIW, at the risk of alienating readers, I believe that our society will also (eventually) come to the conclusion that slaughtering cows and pigs, 97% of which happens in the horrific conditions of factory farming, really isn’t part of a civilized society. Obviously, this will take a great while, but I’m betting that in 100 years, if through some miracle we still have a civilization here, we will have gotten rid of many of the barbarisms that mark our culture today. This is largely because we’re becoming a more secular and reasoning people, and eventually things like factory farming–as well as the death penalty, torture, bull fighting, etc. will simply disappear.

Tagged with: , , , , ,
10 comments on “Dealing with the Externalities of Our Major Industries
  1. Frank Eggers says:

    It would help if the price of meat covered the externalities. That wouldn’t be likely to keep people from eating meat, but it could be expected to reduce the amount of meat that people eat.

    There is already a trend towards eating less meat. That doesn’t mean a big move towards vegetarianism, but rather, a trend toward having meat to be a smaller portion of meals.

  2. marcopolo says:

    Craig,

    Hmmm, y’know there are are more than 3 billion carnivorous pets in the world?

    That’s a lot of carnivores to feed daily, or do you suggest we cull 3 billion animals on ideological grounds ? Children, especially growing boys need protein, especially V B12. This can only be obtained from eating living animals.

    The human race are not vegetarians, we are omnivorous, we eat meat! Not politically correct meat, just meat. I am certainly not ashamed about my interests in farm production of beef and pork, these are essential for human health.

    My cat needs meat to survive, how is her life less precious than any other ?

    I’m not ashamed of producing meat for human (or pet) consumption !

    • craigshields says:

      I’m not 100% against producing meat, but:

      Factory farming is incredibly cruel and needs to go away, and
      I believe that the human race will be phasing out meat consumption, for a variety of reasons, over the next 100 years.

      Of course, I could be wrong; that’s happened once or twice…

    • Frank Eggers says:

      If meat were essential to human health, by now I would be experiencing the consequences of not eating meat since I stopped eating it decades ago. As for B12, the soy milk I drink contains 50% of the recommended amount of B12 per 240 ml serving.

      I certainly do not believe that B12 is available only from LIVING animals. There was an ancient Greek cult (I can’t remember which one) which ate animals alive but I think that it no longer exists.

      When I was going to be out of town for a while, I took my late dog, Bowser, to the Canine Country Club. They told me that some of their customers provide vegetarian food for their cats and dogs. I don’t know the details or how it works out.

  3. Gary Tulie says:

    Beef and Pork are certainly not essential parts of the human diet – if they were, there would be no Muslims, Jews or Hindus. Muslims and Jews are prohibited from eating pork because the pig is considered unclean, whilst Hindus consider the cow sacred (One of the sacred mothers), so do not eat Beef.

    Is there a case for eating meat / animal derived protein in moderation?

    I believe there is. Some land can only be harnessed for food production by grazing animals, and as part of sustainable management, it is necessary to kill some animals to maintain a balance.

    i.e. keeping deer numbers down so that they do not destroy woodland, and catching Asian Carp which have invaded certain US river systems to the detriment of native species. If you have to kill them anyway, lets make use of them.

    What is certainly not necessary or even healthy is the high meat content of the average Western diet, and a gradual shift of diet to one containing less meat – raised to higher ethical standards using cleaner more sustainable forms of animal husbandry would certainly be an improvement.

    Further, we need to look at which animals we eat, as in some areas animals such as Rabbit, Goat, Camel, not to mention meal worm, grasshopper, and various types of Beatles and grubs might provide a more sustainable and probably healthier alternative.

    • marcopolo says:

      Hi Gary,

      You are correct. The type of meat consumed isn’t really important. Although some types of meat are claimed to be healthier than others, it remains a matter of on going, and often changing, debate among scientists.

      Humans are the most successful omnivorous animal. Raising high yield food products like beef, sheep and pork is just the most economic method of producing mass food suitable for mass distribution.

      Despite my respect for Hindu and other religious dietary practices, I find I’m not alone in my preference for a diet that includes steak, pork, poultry, fish etc.

      No one is as annoying as a dinner guest with complicated dietary preferences based more on the need to feel special, than any actual dietary restriction.

      Like any other human activity, raising animals for meat is a complex industry. Like any industry, farm practices need constant improvement, research, education and investment.

      I’ve a friend in Australia who raise crocodiles for consumption. I’ll admit I would feel better sending a truck load of crocs to slaughter, than pigs ! ( I always feel sad for the fate of pigs. The croc on the other hand would eagerly eat me).

      • craigshields says:

        Good point. Though I don’t eat any higher on the food chain than fish, I don’t communicate that to my hosts; it’s rude. If I wind up with a huge salad and extra vegetables, that’s fine with me. I’ll even eat a bit of chicken or turkey so no one thinks I’m not being satisfied; it’s also rude to make the host and other guests feel bad.

        Interesting story about the crocs and pigs; I feel the same way.

        • Frank Eggers says:

          Your approach is entirely valid. However, some hosts (and hostesses) are quite unreasonable.

          My sister and her husband, both of whom are vegetarians, visited an out of town relative. The relative knew that both were vegetarians but yet put beef bullion into one of the dishes telling my sister that it would make it taste better and that her husband wouldn’t know the difference.

          I think that although guests should be considerate, hosts should make a reasonable effort to accommodate their needs. If I had a visitor who was Muslim, Jewish, or whatever, I would make an effort to accommodate his beliefs even though my beliefs would differ. Thus, I would have no problem driving a guest to a mosque or whatever. Once, when I was visiting a Muslim family, they drove me to church. Surely we can all adhere to our beliefs and still accommodate and respect people of other beliefs.

          It is important to live in a responsible, kind, and considerate manner even if we differ somewhat on the details. If we don’t do that, nothing else much matters.

  4. marcopolo says:

    Hi Frank,

    Adult males who have been raised on meat eating, will be more successful in not suffering ill-effects from a vegetarian diet than growing boys.

    Animal products such as eggs and milk, do contain V12, but it’s far harder for the human constitution (especially growing children) to successfully metabolize. Meat contains lot’s of other dietary necessities, which is why humans, like pigs and bears are equipped by evolution with a good set of canine teeth !

    Dogs can live on a sort of vegetarian diet, as long as it’s laced and fortified with manufactured supplements replacing those found in meat.

    Cats on the other hand have evolved to eat a diet of only meat. Felines rely upon meat to metabolize and produce vitamins and fatty acids in their pre-formed state. Cats can’t make these amino acids and vitamins in their own bodies the way herbivores or omnivores can.

    Being a vegetarian, or vegan, is a matter of personal philosophy. I wouldn’t dream of being so impertinent as to impose my views on the dietary choices others may wish to pursue.

    In return, I only ask others to not evangelize their belief’s, and withhold imposing their beliefs upon their unfortunate pets.

    • craigshields says:

      Yes, evangelizing vegans can be obnoxious. When asked, I explain why I don’t eat higher on the food chain than fish, but I never bring it up unprompted.