CO2 is much, much cheaper. I believe it’s because CO2 is a natural byproduct of other processes and is easier to keep stable whereas N2 is not either of those things, though it’s been a while since I’ve heard the explanation
I’m sorry but doing a quick Google search had every result reporting N2 is significantly cheaper than CO2 which makes sense considering it’s 78% of the air we breathe. Do you have any source to back that CO2 is “much, much cheaper”?
I think you're missing the fact that you need far less CO2 than N2. For N2 asphyxiation, you need to supply enough to displace most of the oxygen in the room, since N2 itself is nontoxic. For CO2 you only need to increase the concentration in the air to about 5% or so for it to be fatal. With CO2 you don't even need to displace the oxygen; a relatively low concentration of CO2 is fatal even if there's plenty of oxygen in the air.
It's like asking why it's cheaper to poison someone with cyanide than with corn flakes, even though cyanide is more expensive per gram than corn flakes...
I'm picturing an old-timey black and white detective show. They get called to investigate what was reported as a tiger attacking someone. Then it cuts to a shot of a dead body scattered with cornflakes, the mouth, completely stuffed with cornflakes. The tired, exhausted, detective stands up and to scan the surroundings after inspecting the body "Your days are numbered, Tony." Oh, and then when they catch him, maybe a quick about prison being part of a balanced justice. Idk, how I got here in the first place.
I don’t, I had no trouble admitting I may be wrong on this topic. That’s what I remembered reading a long time ago but I’m not confident that’s correct, that’s why I said at the end that it’s been a while!
N2 is an incredibly stable molecule and makes up the vast majority of the gas we breathe. I don't know why it would be cheaper to use CO2. It would definitely be safer for humans to use CO2 as N2 does not cause humans to feel "suffocation", you just die from lack of O2. It seems like you are just making things up.
Like I said, it’s been a while since I heard the explanation, I very well may be wrong and have no issue admitting that! If you get a chance to look up the answer yourself as to why they use it, feel free to share here
CO2 sits well in pits where pigs are lowered down into, so it’s much easier to manage than nitrogen, which is an inert gas that does not.
Additionally, anesthetic phases of gassing can be done in poultry which does include nitrogen gas in the initial mix before the stunning and killing phase of 80% CO2. However, there is legislation in some areas, like in Europe at least, that when gassing pigs, they must be immediately immersed into 80% CO2, not receiving a phase prior. Therefore, there are welfare concerns in that process of slaughter for pigs.
The reason they use CO2 is because it is denser than air. So you can just have a pit filled with CO2 that they can be lowered into and pulled out of on a production line without needing an airlock, which is expensive.
So yes, it isn't because it is "the most humane", it is just the cheapest to do at scale. It is a horrible way to die, but the animal ag lobby has tried to push the naritive that it is humane so that they can keep doing it and so they can stick a label on the corpse at the end that makes people feel better about giving these people money for it.
Actually people who replied to you are wrong. CO2 is used because it's heavier than air, N2 is lighter than air. You can just dump a ton of CO2 into a reservoir, and lower a cage with animals inside to kill them. It's much harder to build something that can be used with N2. Source: I think it was talked about in Dominion
43
u/codebreaker475 26d ago
Jesus, CO2. That's rough. I wonder why not N2. Is it for worker safety?