I once calculated that if we reduce the land use for livestock by 50% and then use 10% of the newly freed land to build housing (the other 40% can become nature), we can build a city something like 1.5x times the size of Amsterdam, the largest city in the Netherlands.
It’s not a lack of land. It’s how the land is being used. Almost half is for livestock (or more accurate: to dump the shit of that livestock, as the majority of the animals is kept indoors).
Is the land the livestock are currently using capable of supporting dense housing and is it close to urban cores. Or would you just build sky scrapers in the middle of nowhere, because China tried that and it failed.
Anything in the Netherlands is close to an urban core.
They also have centuries of experience on building on lands that shouldn’t be capable of supporting dense housing. Amsterdam used to be a literal swamp as well (I’m not making any statements on its current status).
The Netherlands exports an enormous amount of meat currently. It’s the largest exporter of meat of any EU country. They export 60% of the meat they produce. So yeah, they would be fine.
The Netherlands is currently really suffering from nitrogen pollution, in a big part because of the meat industry. So it would also be a great improvement for the environment to reduce the meat production.
Having such a big part of the European meat production localized in one of the most populated regions in the EU is just a recipe for disaster.
“Less food”? What are you talking about? Most of the land used for livestock is for exported meat. Also, meat is an incredibly unsustainable source of food.
I once calculated that if we reduce the land use for livestock by 50% and then use 10% of the newly freed land to build housing (the other 40% can become nature), we can build a city something like 1.5x times the size of Amsterdam, the largest city in the Netherlands.
It’s not a lack of land. It’s how the land is being used. Almost half is for livestock (or more accurate: to dump the shit of that livestock, as the majority of the animals is kept indoors).
Is the land the livestock are currently using capable of supporting dense housing and is it close to urban cores. Or would you just build sky scrapers in the middle of nowhere, because China tried that and it failed.
Anything in the Netherlands is close to an urban core.
They also have centuries of experience on building on lands that shouldn’t be capable of supporting dense housing. Amsterdam used to be a literal swamp as well (I’m not making any statements on its current status).
Haha I like your disclaimer, as it was indeed very inviting to reply with a “still a swamp” :)
So less food, more people? Have you heard the term “famine” before?
The Netherlands exports an enormous amount of meat currently. It’s the largest exporter of meat of any EU country. They export 60% of the meat they produce. So yeah, they would be fine.
The Netherlands is currently really suffering from nitrogen pollution, in a big part because of the meat industry. So it would also be a great improvement for the environment to reduce the meat production.
Having such a big part of the European meat production localized in one of the most populated regions in the EU is just a recipe for disaster.
“Less food”? What are you talking about? Most of the land used for livestock is for exported meat. Also, meat is an incredibly unsustainable source of food.
Livestock are incredibly inefficient at producing food. If you use a small fraction of the land to grow crops there will be plenty to eat.
deleted by creator