• WafflesTasteGood [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 days ago

    While cost efficiency is probably a factor, id lean a lot more to cruelty being the point. Not to justify mass killing of animals here, but theres absolutely better choices than CO2 which causes suffering in basically all oxygen breathing creatures.

    • BanSwitch2Buyers [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      2 days ago

      It’s definitely cost. They don’t give a fuck about animals, workers, environment, etc. This is likely deemed cheapest because it’s mostly mechanized and requires fewer workers.

    • ClimateStalin [they/them, he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      I will tell you that CO2 euthanasia is generally considered a humane method, although in research they tell us that and then also don’t allow its use on anything bigger than a pre-adolescent rat.

      I do not like this method, and have always thought it was really weird that it was considered acceptable. Seems like N2 or CO would be much better choices, and aren’t more expensive. But generally CO2 is accepted by animal ethics boards.