is cactus or other plant based leather any good? i can't any real data on it, because the internet has been fricked with the desserto buttholes paying for fake influencer campaigns
vegan leather
is cactus or other plant based leather any good? i can't any real data on it, because the internet has been fricked with the desserto buttholes paying for fake influencer campaigns
Get the frick out of here.
I have a cactus leather belt, and I haven't had any issues with it.
vegan leather probably means the fruit leather you can eat?
it's a dried fruit paste available in strips
pretty sure he's referring to things like alternatives to cowhide, that is, things "made of leather", like wallets and bags and the like
i don't really see the point myself in making a plant-based alternative specifically, i mean we have more durable materials nowadays if strength is an issue, and that rarity/exotic nature would also disappear with an alternative, so why bother?
It's a gimmick like bug burger, nut milk, or lab grown meat.
The processes to create these products are often just as harmful to the environment as the product processes they are trying to replace. Or, the product is unfeasible to produce in mass.
En masse.*
>En masse
Friends don't let friends France.
supposedly in this case it is less water and less space, but i dunno. cows use a lot of resources or something. you're feeding an animal shaped truck
The key is what land. Generally we raise cattle on crap land. That's not good for a whole lot else. You don't put cattle ranches in the citrus growing areas of Florida or napa valley California or even the corn belt of Iowa. You put cattle ranches in the nothing of Oklahoma and Northwest Texas.
Vegan leather and most of other environmentally friendly boondoggles divert useful land from other uses.
This. I'm a vegan tradie, I buy leather boots and my belt is leather because non leather just wastes away so quickly it makes no sense/is more destructive to the planet.
plastic and leather are insanely good materials and anything else is a quality compromise. i think people who want to avoid animal products and plastics are aware of this. vegan food isn't cheap, fake leather doesn't last, paper straws get squishy.
there's still a market for alternatives, and there always will be. people want them because they like them and they have money and its interesting and they like animals or whatever.
My canvas Irish Setters have lasted nearly 2 decades
>I'm a vegan tradie
Hey, me too! Not many of us out there.
There's nothing even close to the quality of real animal leathers.
Nut milk is pulverized nuts mixed with a wienertail of chemicals. How could that possibly be healthier than cow's milk?
Cows need more resources but we use them for more than just leather. Their versatility justifies the resources needed to raise them.
Why not just call yourself vegetarian and enjoy leather, eggs, and milk?
>people want them because they like them and they have money and its interesting and they like animals or whatever.
No, people want them because they are trend-following sheep who want to virtue signal how environmentally conscious they are. I say if you really want to reduce your carbon footprint then have a nice day.
He's also right. Plowing up fields to prepare for planting kills tons of moles, snakes, frogs, etc.
We have evolved to eat animals and animal product. Veganism leads to loads of health problems like anemia, muscle density loss, hair loss, hyperthyroidism, and even depression. It's impossible to eat a vegan diet without needing to take a bunch of supplements to cover for nutrients they aren't getting - and that's proof that humans are not meant to be strict vegans.
>why not call yourself a vegetarian...
I do eat eggs from my friends free range chickens, I get two dozen per week and myself eat 2-3/day. If they don't bring me eggs I just don't eat eggs that week.
>health problems
I get annual physicals and blood work and even when I was pure vegan I am in perfect health, it's been nearly 20 years. The issue I see with vegans is they just eat food to feel full, which doesn't work, you need to basically be eating legumes, heavy greens and nuts all day to keep shit in order, eggs are a huge help obviously, but I went about a decade without them and was still fine, just a lot more work + I'd have a natural supplement to ensure I got my b12 and folate or wtv just to not ruin my body.
>milk
Frick milk, not only have I always been lactose intolerant, I don't like how the industry works.
>folate
Why did you need to supplement folate on a veg heavy diet?
Just followed what my doctor told me to do based on blood work.
Interesting, I wonder why the folate was low then?
>nut milk
h-hot...............
same
wanna...
Veganism is really quite a wasteful ideology.
its not meant to be efficient, moron. you're thinking in terms of pure amoral capitalism, which is a race to the bottom at the expense of everything else including the well-being of animals. if you want something else it will obviously be less efficient and will cost more money.
How many animals are harmed by veganism?
what?
How many animals are harmed by veganism?
Another genius trying to compare deaths of small critters from plant agriculture to deaths of animal agriculture, while completely forgetting that small critters will still die in the plant agriculture needed to feed livestock. Vegans are always going to have the moral high ground because their arguments are just right. If you try to argue with the idea that veganism kills animals you'll always lose because it's moronic. If you want to eat meat then just accept the fact that you're killing an animal for it. This is PrepHole. It's what I do. I'd kill a cow for tasty burgers. I'd kill a dog for tasty burgers. Shit I'd kill you for tasty burgers. Stop trying to outmoralgay vegans it's fricking moronic.
Know a girl who does it for the climate, eats a lot of avocado, then i showed her an article about the carbon footprint of avocado. You can drive from Amsterdam to Berlin and emit less CO2 than eating a single avocado.
She arrogantly dismissed the article i shown her for being 'not good science'... It was a peer reviewed and published article.
how does that work? I have had an avocado tree in my yard when I lived in Florida, and I have a hard time seeing how it was some huge environmental issue in a way that's vastly different from other tree crops?? I get that they probably use weird fertilizers and stuff for commercial crops.
I saw a peer reviewed article that "proved" that it was better for the environment to eat produce that was shipped from overseas rather than eating locally produced. The way they justified this conclusion was by comparing the energy usage of indoor, hydroponic, artificially lit, and heated greenhouse tomatoes being grown in a far northern european climate to tomatoes grown in the mediterranean outdoors. That didn't pass muster for me.
Oh this reminds me of the claim about how much water beef takes to produce.
instead of the amount consumed by one bullock eating grass pasture they base the figure assuming all water was from irrigated crops in the middle of a desert
>how much water beef takes to produce.
how about one almond taking 3.2 gallons, and many are grown in California which has no water to spare, and steals water from other states.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X17308592
https://www.c-win.org/cwin-water-blog/2022/7/11/california-almond-water-usage
Both are terrible. Beef ruin forests, and every single largish scale monocrop creates what is essentially a lifeless desert zone since ecosystems don't exist where we grow crops. It's not that complicated, we spray all kinds of junk, kill the soil biome, kill the animals, kill the aquifers etc etc. We are racing to death and if you are not already actively growing your own food to supplement your diet you are ngmi.
Anon, you just run stock on pasture? it's an incredibly low impact system when done right
Of course, but it's never done right at scale- because to do it right requires not only space but a precession of other livestock to help repair the landscape and manage pests/diseases- it's not economically viable. Leading cause of deforestation is beef pasturing down in the Amazon iirc, sold to Canadia/America.
This is why I think figuring out how to do it yourself is essential.
I thought the biiggest was plantation not pasture?
oh no, a gallon of water was used and then ended up back in the ground or in the air. what a waste
>MUH WAAAATERRRRR
gets me every time lmao
water is fricking free
it LITERALLY falls out of the FRICKING SKY
you literally can't fricking use up all the water even if you fricking TRIED
>uhhhhhhhhh... are you aware of how much water the beef industry consumes?
statements dreamed up by the utterly deranged
Why don't you stop using your taps and live purely off the water that falls out of thd fricking sky then you spaztic?
>Why don't you stop using your taps and live purely off the water that falls out of thd fricking sky then you spaztic?
I literally do that right now. I'm not connected to mains water.
And even during the heaviest drought periods in modern history I did not ration water or worry about it running out.
... are you aware of how much water the beef industry consumes?
You seem to be too low IQ to understand this but the point was that the figures about water usage are usually quite distorted for political purposes, they were using the figure of every drop of water that falls within a crop whether the animal consumes it directly or not it was ridiculous
Pic related says an avocado is equivalent to the CO2 emissions from traveling 1.1KM.... I have no idea as to the validity or rationality of their "data" and a lot of times the way that these figures are arrived at aren't very honest.
They'll take the CO2 emissions from burning native old growth forest in order to clear land to plant avocado trees, then claim thats the CO2 output for a crop of avocados and fail to take into account that you could theoretically grow avocados there for millions of years without further increasing the CO2 emissions from this source.
A more fair and balanced take would be to consider the emissions from manufacturing and transporting/using fertilizers and other chemicals, from running the irrigation pumps and other equipment, and from transporting the avocados.
I'm not sure how to interpret this.
Are they aware that the avocado is literally made from atmospheric CO2?
I have an avocado tree in my backyard. Every year it grows taller, sequestering carbon from the atmosphere.
I bet it needs water too. You should probably cut it down, it's destroying the environment.
true if you drive from amsterdam to berlin just to pick up a single avocado
lol, logically impossible, unless, as another poster suggested, they drove there and all the way back to get a single avacado.
some internet rando wrote an article and s/he became your personal jesus.
All the climate/carbon/eco studies are no better. They just make up data and when they get found out 40 years later they just shrug and tell everyone to do a better job jid9ng their data next time
>I'd kil la dog I'd ki...
bruh sometimes I can't tell if it's too much edge or you Americans really think burgers are the best thing in the world...
Veganism is literally worse for animals and the environment in every way and you will continue to deny that fact regardless. You'll never have the moral high ground while regenerative farming exists.
can you explain what you consider regenerative farming?
Literally billions of insects, reptiles, amphibians (and their eggs and other early metamorphic forms) and small mammals are killed in the process of food crop harvesting alone, and that's at current levels of plant consumption that are offset by omnivorous diets.
you're too stupid to discuss any of this with anyone
This. I'm a vegan, but I'm under no illusion my veggies are harmless. Best I can do is buy local and I keep a pretty big garden which keeps me going all summer and into fall. Kale, chard, zucchini, eggplants, a few varieties of beans etc.
Other than that I don't use disposible water bottles and tend not to eat out, realistically if everyone was me we'd be better off but I never push it on anyone or even mention I don't eat meat unless it's offered or I'm going to be a guest. Vegans are to diets what coal rollers are to truggs.
What in that post do you actually dispute as untrue?
veganism and pure frick-you capitalism are two different approaches to a given problem. veganism is better at not being a piece of shit to animals. but its not perfect, because it would be impossible to not have some impact when you're feeding a billion people and producing a hundred thousand shitty backpacks. but that doesn't mean you say "frick it lol" and go back to pure frick-you capitalism. you just do your best. its really simple.
False dichotomy that in no way addresses the actual question.
This kind of bad faith engagement is the main reason people have become conditioned to reject vegans out of hand; they tend to be fanatics whose disingenuous tactics make trying to have a rational conversation with them a waste of time.
Nta but it seems like a really rational approach that I agree with. Nothing is perfect, but we can aim for reduction of waste/harm/cost/ineffeciency wtv your goal is without attaining perfection and it's still better than doing nothing at all. I think buying cheap plastic shit once a year is worse than buying one leather pair of boots. I think chickens roaming around outside and laying eggs is great, but having them in a 1 square foot cage inside is terrible, so I only eat farm eggs where I've seen the chickens. I think forests are great, so I don't buy avocado's and other imported foods that frick forests up, I also keep a huge garden to supplement it all.
If everyone was just rational we'd all be better off, its not about veganism or labels. Once I'm living on my parcel of land there is some chance I'll take up hunting and fishing, it will have less impact than my current imported from 1200miles away vegetarian diet. I hate killing things, picrel is a spider I caught earlier today- I just don't like ending lives, but I can't pretend I live without causing harm and death, I just do my best.
all of them just look at all the products made from a cow
I always thought vegan leather was just a hippy moron way of saying vinyl
yeah this looks like the polyurethane shit ive seen. its a thin film of garbage that looks like leather which is glued to a fabric backing. its cheaper than cow leather. tesla ripped you off sorry.
i think that mycelium, pineapple, cactus leather is supposed to be a solid piece of fabric. it costs more than polyurethane, but im hoping that it won't separate like this.
I love veg tan leather.
Just use regular synthetic leather. It's petroleum based and doesn't use any animal products, it's been around since before WWII, and it will outlast plant leather.
Just buy real leather, buy vintage. Fake leather is almost always terrible for the environment. Veganism is silly, it's a whole lot worship to grow almonds or avacado than it is to eat the fricking DEENZ
Hundreds of years developing ways of using every piece of cow imaginable, and some hippie comes and says he can do better with hemp and Chloro-cyano-4-6-disulfate-methyl-octanic acid
I'm all for new materials, but we have to break away with the moralistic bullshit and make things that are actually good and not just make you feel superior.
This.
It bugs me too. Environmentalists bug me in particular because so many of them want to shame others for modern life while living a modern life.
Like the argument above about food and carbon emissions, yeah, sucks that we're alive now but just about every single thing we do is destroying the planet because of scale.
Moral superiority doesn't cut it for me. Just not into it.
Recently watched a recycling scheme get planned here and there's so much that's gone wrong with it but I've watched a supermarket here prepare for it by building an entire outside area fully paved, tarred, covered with cable laid, machines all for recycling cans and bottles on a deposit scheme that could already be recycled. Not only was building that a significant carbon footprint, not only do I have to travel there via a vehicle (doesn't matter if it's public transport) but they had to demolish the fricking thing and do it again for a scheme that is STILL delayed and may be rolled into another.
All for the price of moral superiority.
Don't even get me started on their signs, flyers and grafitti. Jesus christo, you're using spray paint for your environmental message, it needs to be sandblasted off or painted over? Are you fricki-
Almost all carbon based policy decisions are generally one form of scam or another.
que incoherent rant.
of course they are all scams, modern society wants every solution except those that reduce profitability or production. Personally, I don't bother people about environmentalism or try to take a moral high ground, there is a small minority of dumbasses in every group that have a very loud and obnoxious voice. At the end of the day the planet is getting fricked from every angle and we should be trying to minimize how much we add to it getting fricked.
Eating meat is a huge factor, growing your own veggies or meat animals is a great alternative to store bought anything. Buying smart and not succumbing to shit marketing is another way, don't buy shit tier items, buy good things once that last a long time, including leather goods.
How about electric cars? EV's are a scam, I chose to buy a honda fit instead of a nice tesla 3 with incentives, why? It uses a tiny amount of fuel, it will be on the road far longer than a model 3, it doesn't involve mining lithium, cobalt etc. from shitty places with shitty labor policies and so on. I can also actually fix/work on the car as I am a decent home mechanic.
People just need to be logical in their decisions and pick the right battles. Recycling is another one, people pat themselves on the back for using their blue bin, in reality they should be using 2 picrel every day instead of 8 recyclable waterbottles which is the norm.
it's endless. As usual, the real problem is people's fricked up sense of identity, they want to put on the garb of an environmentalist, a conservative, a liberal wtv. just use your fricking head and stfu about other people's business unless it directly affects you.
Big thing now is microplastics effecting your gamete production and making your wife's womb bear feminized males with slightly off brain development (your son is gonna chug balls b/c you drink out of the bottle in your pic). Is the formerly underground gay/trans population finally not afraid to be in the shadows, or are 4 decades worth of drinking out of disposable plastic bottles, bottles in your pic, and tap water running through miles of PVC creating more malformed queer humans than any time in history??
Okay buy a metal one? I use glass personally. Your rant isn't quite >>>/x/ tier but bairly relevant.
leather is a by-product of the beef industry.
I use leather products all the time, because it’s actually good and works well, and I’m a vegan.
If you’re going to kill the animal anyway…
What a flimsy attitude, they’re only killing animals because you keep paying for it. If everyone stopped eating beef there wouldn’t be an industry.
But then the cows won't be born at all. It's because of their usefulness that they have life and are cared for. Take that away and they are merely pests.
Veganism is mostly anti-natalism by any other means, they don't love animals, they hate humans.
Lol wut. NTA but no, I love most humans and want us to live and continue to prosper on this planet. In order to prosper we require an intact ecology. Modern civilization is putting most ecosystems at risk, thus putting humans at risk. Small corrections to our lifestyles at scale increases the chances we get to continue existing and growing as a species.
It wouldn't feel so shitty if we traded ecology for some higher goal or pushed out species to some new frontier of evolution, but it's not the case. We trade out planet so 1 billion gluttonous fricks can drive truggs and have diabetes while becoming less advanced as a species. We trade forests for junk toys, less time with our families, less culture etc. We could have used these resources to have the opposite, but as a species we dropped the ball and it will be our eventual demise. Maybe not in the next 30 years or some schizo timescale, but can you really expect the planet to carry our current lifestyles for another 100 years? 500 years? A drop in the bucket culturally, and if true, we are basically done already.
Anon we have been shrinking agriculture land under use for farming across the world for 3 years because we have gotten so fucjing good at farming. Population is also going to collapse everywhere because women want to be on the pill and we're not a a smart enough species to survive that.
Cows aren't taking useful land we could be growing more productive crops on. Cows don't eat 10,000 pounds of grain to make 1 pound of beef. They eat some grass on a hillside that no one was going to farm anyway because it sucks. That's why they exist.
Sorry 30 years, not 3
>rates of cancer under 50 increasing
>quality of life for every generation after boomers decreasing
>wages not matching inflation or cost of living
>food is full of hormones and or plastic
>farmers fields are deserts, empty of any life besides a rootless pos water pumped sugar husk resembling a plant we used to eat
>population exploding because of access to modern farming
>the resources we need to sustain modern agriculture quickly dwindling, petroleum based fertilizers, phosphorous etc.
>aquifers we draw water from to water our fields quickly diminishing or becoming poisoned
I think we are doing a shit job and modern farming has lead to a population growth so unsustainable it will kill most of our species eventually.
I get it, it's pretty amazing we've been able to support the boom in other industries that could only happen via the ease that modern agriculture has given us. The question is, how much better are we as a species now? We sell away every technological advancement we invest in via tax dollars to corps for pennies, it's sold back to us in a way that only makes our lives more miserable. The birth of the industrial revolution should have lead to 3 day work weeks, community, time in nature, time understanding our past- instead we've been severed from our ancestors and paying the price now. People can't survive, if they could, they'd want to start families and enjoy life. ~
Don't worry bro, we're already at the peak of youth. Species is dying from here on out. You won.
The cows aren’t cared for, they spend their whole life shoulder to shoulder in cages, eating GMO corn and meters away from a lagoon filled with their shit.
Free range is another deal of course, but farmers can’t sustain that unless if they’re 100 percent livestock farmers, and they’re at a loss if not subsidized. Until we can adopt a standard of ground cover to crops to grazing, instead of tilling and fertilizing the same plot until it erodes, free range will suffer as well.
A life of suffering is better than no life at all. The simple fact that the cow's life and death has benefits to people has meaning and justifies the cows. Without the harvest there is no purpose to the cow and thus a vegan world robs the value of the animal's life.
Unfortunately it's incredibly difficult for farmers to do what's best when they have to compete with these huge cow factory corps. I wish I knew what the solution is to that other than campaigning and encouraging people to buy from small local farms that focus on regenerative farming practices.
>renewable
>biodegradable
>byproduct of food industry that would otherwise go to waste
>environmentalists want to use plastic shit instead
Just use real leather and claim it's vegan.
Remember, Veganism isn't about any principles, it's about signaling that you are better than others without any meaningful virtues.
nothing that has the word "vegan" in it is good