A kg of almonds takes 3000 liters of water, so that’s 1.9 calories per liter.
Near as I can tell water cost of meat ranges from 2000 l/kg for chicken to maybe 15,000 l/kg for beef. That’s 0.09-0.6 calories/liter. So, 3-20x more people can eat almonds than meat.
You think they’re just growing and throwing away the almonds or something? Sheesh, people will use the stupidest most twisted logic to justify their own shitty actions.
I think almonds use an inordinate amount of water.
Less than meat. But don’t just take my word for it: CA-Ag-Water-Use.pdf https://pacinst.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/CA-Ag-Water-Use.pdf
If I look at German sources almonds and beef/pork have the following overall water demand for 1 kg product:
Almonds: 10000-15000 L/kg, beef: 15400 L/kg, pork needs apparently half of beef
That does not necessarily sound like “less than meat”. Granted almonds are among the most water consuming plants. Potatoes need only 290 L/kg.
https://berlin.nabu.de/umwelt-und-ressourcen/oekologisch-leben/essen-und-trinken/32632.html https://www.landwirtschaft.de/umwelt/natur/wasser/wasserfussabdruck-wie-viel-wasser-steckt-in-landwirtschaftlichen-produkten
Yeah, but how many people are eating that meat versus those almonds.
A kg of almonds takes 3000 liters of water, so that’s 1.9 calories per liter.
Near as I can tell water cost of meat ranges from 2000 l/kg for chicken to maybe 15,000 l/kg for beef. That’s 0.09-0.6 calories/liter. So, 3-20x more people can eat almonds than meat.
You think they’re just growing and throwing away the almonds or something? Sheesh, people will use the stupidest most twisted logic to justify their own shitty actions.
Those data are thrown off by Spiders Georg