• Apollo42@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Which would be an argument against using palm instead of soy if we grew soy primarily for its oil, rather than gaining the oil as a byproduct of growing soy to feed animals.

    • Victoria Antoinette @lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      over 80% of soy is pressed for oil. they press it in an oil press. The byproduct of that process is soy meal or soy cake. The oil is only about 20% of the bean but makes up about half of its crop value. soybeans are grown for oil and because they rotate with corn. they help fixate nitrogen for other crops and they produce oil. The fact that we’re able to also feed the byproduct of the oil production to animals is a conservation of resources.

      • Apollo42@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        None of what you are saying is necessarily untrue but you still have the cart before the horse. Soy is as widespread as it is because we can use it to sustain industrial livestock farming, it isn’t some happy side effect as much as it is the deliberate intention.

        • Victoria Antoinette @lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          it’s not accurate to say the soy beans are grown for animals at all though. they’re grown for markets and soild health. markets value the oil far higher on a per pound basis than the rest of the bean. I just can’t believe a telling of the story of soybeans that places animal feed so prominently, when it’s literally the industrial waste that is fed to animals.