• @WHYAREWEALLCAPS@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    331 year ago

    Only going to replace palm oil if it is cheaper than palm oil. It always comes down to money. It could cure cancer and give you a tax refund, but if it costs too much it’ll never see wide acceptance.

  • @Fantomas@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    191 year ago

    Whenever I see ‘could’ or any other modal verb in a newspaper article, I always reverse the sentence.

    ‘This could not be the holy grail to replace palm oil’ is equally true.

    Journalism is a silly passtime.

    • @krayj@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      71 year ago

      I call it “what if?” news… so I basically I do the same thing you do, only instead of replacing “could” with “could not”… I just rewrite the sentence to start off with the words “What if”, like this: “What if this could be the holy grail to replace palm oil”.

      Replacing “What if” with “IN A WORLD, WHERE…” and then doing in the movie trailer guy’s voice works equally well.

      • @Coreidan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        41 year ago

        You’re right. It’s not silly for the rich folks who use the media to brainwash the public. They have everything to gain from pushing propaganda down the throats of everyone

    • @xX_fnord_Xx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      As I understand it, the downside is that indigenous farmers mow down and/or burn local forests to plant the oil palms, destroying the areas biodiversity. Native animals that are used to living alongside a plethora of local plants suddenly have acres of trees that do not benefit them at all.

      Correct me if I’m wrong. It seems like oil palms are the best for human farmers, not the environment.

    • Amju Wolf
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11 year ago

      It’s best for the environment, period. It has good properties and you can grow a ton of in a given area.

      The only better alternative would be to actually lower oil consumption, but that isn’t going to happen.

  • @gressen@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    101 year ago

    It is made from a by-product from the linseed industry, plus natural fibre and rapeseed oil.

    • @Wogi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      51 year ago

      That’s a pretty similar description to vegetable oil, which was also branded as the healthier option to… something. And it turns out it’s not healthier than anything.

      Heavily processed oils aren’t going to be healthier than natural sources of fat. Palm fruit is naturally fatty.

  • ivanafterall
    link
    fedilink
    6
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Food experts at Queen Margaret University (QMU) in Edinburgh say their new 100% plant-based ingredient is 70% better for the environment.

    And with 80% less saturated fat and 30% fewer calories, they are also hailing PALM-ALT as a significantly healthier option.

    Scientists also noted that 60% of the time, it works 100% of the time.

    • @Wogi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      21 year ago

      I get mighty weary when a labcoat comes up with a new fat and says it’s a healthier option. That has yet to actually be true.

  • elouboub
    link
    fedilink
    11 year ago

    In this world, it can only succeed if it costs less to produce as much as its rival.

    • @glue_snorter@lemmy.sdfeu.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      41 year ago

      You have a point, but the reason palm oil is so cheap is that Indonesia turns a blind eye to the clear-cutting. Those costs are externalised, and we all pay them every day, whether we consume palm oil or not.

      Fucking corruption, man.

      Fuck Peter Lim and everyone like him.