Cricket protein is not terrible, I've had shakes and bars with it. It can replace whey protein. But, two downsides. One, it's quite a bit more expensive at the moment. If something is using less of the earth's resources, less water, less land, less plants, it should cost less to the consumer. The other downside is the allergen statement. It's not an ingredient you'll ever be able to sneak in, and a lot of people are allergic to shellfish.
(07-24-2022, 07:06 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Cricket protein is not terrible, I've had shakes and bars with it. It can replace whey protein. But, two downsides. One, it's quite a bit more expensive at the moment. If something is using less of the earth's resources, less water, less land, less plants, it should cost less to the consumer. The other downside is the allergen statement. It's not an ingredient you'll ever be able to sneak in, and a lot of people are allergic to shellfish.
I just knew the local communist would applaud this. A true government schill.
You can always tell the ones that didn’t bother to read the article
Thank God I know how to hunt and fish.......... ANd grow my own veggies........ I was operating a John Deere before I learned to drive a car.......
(07-24-2022, 07:16 PM)Ronster Wrote: [ -> ] (07-24-2022, 07:06 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Cricket protein is not terrible, I've had shakes and bars with it. It can replace whey protein. But, two downsides. One, it's quite a bit more expensive at the moment. If something is using less of the earth's resources, less water, less land, less plants, it should cost less to the consumer. The other downside is the allergen statement. It's not an ingredient you'll ever be able to sneak in, and a lot of people are allergic to shellfish.
I just knew the local communist would applaud this. A true government schill.
You can always tell the ones that didn’t bother to read the article
You call that applauding?
But yes, I didn't read the article.
The article was primarily about Trudeau forcing farmers to reduce fertilizer emissions, not eating bugs. That being said, this bugs-as-food thing has been around since at least the late 60's. Anyone else out there remember chocolate covered ants?
Seems like the only bug that would really provide any 'meat' would be a locust or cicadia, and I wouldn't eat either. Too gooey.
And Trudeau is a dick. One of the worst PM's in Canada's history. And they are stuck with him till 2025 and maybe beyond. O Canada, indeed.
(07-25-2022, 10:20 AM)NewJagsCity Wrote: [ -> ]The article was primarily about Trudeau forcing farmers to reduce fertilizer emissions, not eating bugs. That being said, this bugs-as-food thing has been around since at least the late 60's. Anyone else out there remember chocolate covered ants?
Seems like the only bug that would really provide any 'meat' would be a locust or cicadia, and I wouldn't eat either. Too gooey.
And Trudeau is a dick. One of the worst PM's in Canada's history. And they are stuck with him till 2025 and maybe beyond. O Canada, indeed.
Overuse of fertilizer disrupts disrupts the environment in multiple ways, but when droughts are causing the flow of water to many farms to be reduced, it is not the time to cut back on fertilizer, in the areas that still recieve plenty of water like Canada.
(07-25-2022, 12:14 PM)Ronster Wrote: [ -> ] (07-25-2022, 11:44 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] Overuse of fertilizer disrupts disrupts the environment in multiple ways, but when droughts are causing the flow of water to many farms to be reduced, it is not the time to cut back on fertilizer, in the areas that still recieve plenty of water like Canada.
sigh..
![[Image: tfi_2021_sustainabilitygraphics_v5_kb-04.jpg]](https://www.tfi.org/sites/default/files/tfi_2021_sustainabilitygraphics_v5_kb-04.jpg)
What is that graph supposed to be showing us?
The real question is
Will the crickets improve 5G coverage?
(07-25-2022, 01:03 PM)Ronster Wrote: [ -> ] (07-25-2022, 12:29 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]What is that graph supposed to be showing us?
https://www.tfi.org/sustainability
Ah.
Trudeau and Rutte aren't concerned about how much CO2 is emitted while fertilizer is produced.
They are concerned about dead zones and other disruptions in the marine environment as fertilizer runs downstream.
(07-25-2022, 06:24 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (07-25-2022, 01:03 PM)Ronster Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.tfi.org/sustainability
Ah.
Trudeau and Rutte aren't concerned about how much CO2 is emitted while fertilizer is produced.
They are concerned about dead zones and other disruptions in the marine environment as fertilizer runs downstream.
Ya, that’s what their worried about, lol