I just watched the movie "Sustainable" on Netflix today. I liked much of the movie, especially the first half when they were talking about uncommon vegetables and grains. In the latter part of the movie they began to address meat production and there were a few statements I had difficulty with. (For those who want to review, from around 60 minutes into the movie) 1. They stated that some areas could only be used for cattle, not for the production of plant-based food. Implying that a vegetarian diet meant lots of useful land would be wasted. Instead they champion the idea of grass-fed beef. 30-40% of the agricultural land is grassland unsuitable for crop production, this would be 85% in the United States. 2. They state that grass-fed beef is actually good for the climate. The cows are supposed to work the carbon into the soil with their hooves... Instinctively I'm inclined to call both claims ********. With regard to 2. I would say the methane cattle produces alone would trump anything they would "work into the soil" with their hooves. With regard to 1. I would say that some crops might not grow very well on land that is currently being used for cattle but: 1) perhaps other crops would grow there, crops that can do with much less water for example. 2) not all land is needed if we cut meat and dairy from our diet. Any other thoughts?