Scientists claim insects have a smaller carbon footprint as they require fewer resources to be farmed.
Okay, my
pegged out so hard on this statement the needle bent.
Critters still have to be fed, which means to produce a gram pf protein, the critter still consumes what all is needed to produce that gram.
While they may not be as big as a sheep or cow, and may not take up as much space, individually, a kilogram of protein is a kilogram of protein, and would take the same amount of Carbon, Hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen. Incidentally, they'd produce the same amount of waste, too, just in bits much harder to scoop up one at a time.
In one instance, you get a cow, which can be used to produce milk, eaten, producing hide and other useful by-products, and even other cattle. In another a sheep, producer of wool, mutton, sheep by-products and other sheep.
In yet another hand, you get piles of bugs. Bugs are harder to lasso, tougher to herd (you think cats are bad, try herding crickets--even catching just one can be a challenge), you can't hang a bell around their neck, and the dog is going to be vexed trying to get them into the back pasture. Branding, tagging, or marking bugs so that if they get out they can be recovered is going to be a mess, especially if they are in the neighbor's fields.
So, while the
may be buying this nonsense, I'm not.
Moving and storing a kilogram of food for the bugs isn't going to take any less work than moving and storing a kilogram of food for traditional livestock, and the neighbor's chicken, ducks, and guinea fowl aren't going to have the same sort of a field day if they get in amongst the cows.
So maybe this
should be rechristened "bugshit".
