You’ve heard it from the Greens, you’ve heard it from your friends, you’ve probably even heard it from your grandma… and now you’re hearing it from the government too. What’s the big deal? Do we really need to eat less meat – or none at all? I would argue that becoming vegetarian could be the most effective action you take against climate change. Consider the following.
A meaty blow
In 2006, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) released the Livestock’s Long Shadow report, which showed that livestock farming accounts for 18% of all human-produced global greenhouse gas emissions, more than cars, planes, ships and all other forms of transport put together (which account for 13%). And this may even be an underestimate: a 2009 report from the US think tank, Worldwatch Institute, suggests a figure of at least 51%.
The UN emissions figure for livestock production includes all associated activities, including clearing forested land, making and transporting fertiliser and the use of fossil fuels by farm vehicles; Worldwatch included additional factors such as exhalations from livestock. The environmental impacts of these activities include water, air and soil degradation, biodiversity loss and climate change, the report concludes. Furthermore, due to population growth and rising levels of affluence in low and middle income countries, meat production is likely to rise: the FAO estimated that it would more than double between 2001 and 2050, although this projection is contentious.
Striking as these figures are, I’m not sure they are news. The environmental impact of livestock production is so well documented in the media it seems somewhat banal to report that, for example, a single cow (or bull) emits up to 200 litres of methane a day, a greenhouse gas that has at least a 25 times greater impact on warming than CO2; or that animal manure generates nitrous oxide, another greenhouse gas that has a 296 times greater impact on warming than CO2; or that there are more than 100 million cattle in the US alone, belching and pooping, every day. Houston, we have a problem.
Veggie consensus
Nor is it breaking news that a vegetarian diet is better for the planet. Back in 2008, Dr Rajendra Pachauri, chair of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), told The Guardian that he thought people should “give up meat for one day [per week] at least initially, and decrease it from there”.
These views were echoed in 2010 by Lord Nicholas Stern, former adviser to the Labour government on the economics of climate change. The UN has issued a further report urging a global move toward eating less meat and dairy. Even some British MPs are encouraging people to reduce meat consumption in response to the related issue of making the global food supply more sustainable, with the aim of easing pressure on developing countries and the world’s poor.
Roger that
Many of us would consider one or more meat-free days a week. It requires no radical shake up of our meal plans or social life – it’s manageable and probably healthier too. The more affluent might consider consuming organic or local; although meat produced in this way offers few benefits in terms of reduced CO2 emissions, it is better than factory farmed equivalents (fewer pesticides, less transport).
But if you are serious about reducing your carbon footprint, you’re better off becoming vegetarian. At least you can still enjoy dairy and eggs, right? Unfortunately, the rearing of animals to produce these products results in environmental problems at least as severe as those associated with the production of many kinds of meat.
A comparison of the carbon footprint of a number of common foods, above, clearly shows that a kilo of cheese is over five times more carbon intensive than a kilo of chicken. Yikes! If you’re like me, you probably don’t want to hear this but – from the planet’s perspective – you should probably become vegan: no animal products at all.
Sacred cows?
In the interests of brevity, I have passed over a number of caveats and qualifications, including claims that some mixed, closed-system farms can obtain a high level of efficiency or that some grasslands are better suited to grazing than agriculture; however, due to their exceptional nature, objections such as these are unlikely to seriously challenge the arguments presented by the UN and others. If doubts remain about whether continuing to eat meat can be justified, you might consider the enormous inefficiencies and waste associated with its production, the abject conditions in which most farmed animals live and die, the issue of global food security, and the question of whether raising and killing animals because we happen to like the taste of their flesh is defensible at all.
We lack neither the quantity nor the quality of arguments – just the willingness to act on them. Are we bothered enough to do anything? Assuming we are bothered, and assuming also that we decide to take action by changing what we eat, then the remaining challenge is turning those good intentions into action. Psychologists obsess over it and whole books have been written about the problem of the ‘intention-behaviour gap’ – the ‘gap’ between intending to do something (e.g. to eat vegetarian) and implementing the action (actually eating vegetarian).
Yet, without getting too technical about the science of behaviour change, we can choose to focus on easily achievable goals, simple actions and choices that alter behaviour gradually through reinforcement. It doesn’t have to vegan or broke. Deciding on one meat- or dairy-free day a week or selecting a veggie option when next faced with a meal choice requires little planning and forethought. The important thing is to start.
I take little joy in the prospect of a meat and dairy free future. But I take even less joy entertaining the possible consequences for the planet and its inhabitants if we continue to emit greenhouse gases at current rates. Individual food choices might be personal and challenging them a politically sensitive ‘sacred cow’, but we cannot afford to continue to respect this taboo. Vegetarianism is a serious response to a serious environmental problem. Is this one cow we do need to send to the slaughter?
I think the environmental case for not eating meat is very strong and probably the most convincing to readers of this blog, but the ethical treatment of animals is also important. For example, see this Peta video about industrial animal farming – and I challenge anyone to watch it to the end – it may not convince you to stop eating meat and diary but it will, at the very least, make you think about how we treat other animals.
http://www.peta.org/tv/videos/celebrities-vegetarianism/87206203001.aspx
About to share on LI&FB… what about seafood? My wife and I have been on veggie and seafood for about 6 months now, 3 kids still have meat, but often eat what we eat. What is the carbon footprint of seafood like compared to the rest?
Fish are actually going extinct. It’s irresponsible to eat any wild caught fish at all. Factory-farmed fish are highly polluting as well, plus the fish from there are extremely polluted to eat.
Yes, I do agree that most sustainable systems will not support the level of meat eating that many of us have come to be accustomed to. Actually, I suspect they are likely to support a more healthful diet all around, to include more reliance on fruits and vegetables and a more varied diet overall.
Speaking of varied, it’s too bad our culture is so aghast at the thought of consuming insects. It seems to me that this is a protein source that could be very easily and cost effectively utilized to replace some of the meat in our diets; I suspect insect culture might be attainable at far less cost to the environment than commercial meat production. (I ate a grasshopper once that had inadvertently gotten roasted in my solar oven; it was actually quite delicious!)
Personally, I think the argument on meat vs. no meat is misplaced. The real problem is agricultural practices that rape the environment, including both factory animal farming and agronomic monoculture.
Look at Nature itself. Is Nature exclusively vegan? I think not. Natural ecosystems (as well as many traditional cultures)are living proof that it is possible to integrate both animals and plants into a synergistic system capable of providing tremendous bounty in harmony with the biosphere.
For instance, is a processed soy burger made from beans harvested from the middle of the Midwest’s millions of acres of corn and soy desert really better for the environment than a drumstick from a free range chicken that was raised under the canopy of a Permaculture planting, and performed the valuable services of chemical-free pest control and natural fertilizer production before it was turned into meat? I find that hard to swallow.
Instead of bickering over whether eating meat – or soy, for that matter – is right or wrong, why don’t we start paying more attention to what exactly is going on in our fields and pastures, and support those farmers who are doing their best to adopt environmentally harmonious practices.
Hi Anne,
I certainly recognise your point, and it’s a good one. But I imagine that relatively few chickens will be sustained under the canopy of a permaculture planting, which will produce far more vegetables than meat (unless significant amounts of land and produce are diverted to raising livestock). Would you agree?
If so, I’d say that Francis’s point holds – whether you see eating meat as a moral question or simply a practical one regarding the sort of outputs that would be delivered by an environmentally sustainable form of agriculture – it would be a good thing if people in general ate (considerably) less meat – which probably means a lot of people eating hardly any at all.
Francis has sent over some interesting comments he’s received on his article that we thought we’d post here. It started by highlighting Paul McCartney’s Meat Free Monday campaign, and makes several interesting points, as well as providing some helpful links:
“Vegan food producers sometimes market their products as “meat,” and dictionaries define “meat” as an essential food that includes vegan versions. From that perspective, framing what’s needed as “meat-free days” doesn’t seem to be quite the right message.
On the other hand, pressing people to become vegetarian will likely appear to most people as abrupt and radical as if McDonald’s were to press people to become “meatarian”. Instead, McDonald’s prospers by marketing Happy Meals. So it may be better to promote something more positive, like “Happier Meals”
http://www.shifttheclimate.org/carbon-project-eat-less-meat/
i.e., climate-friendly foods as the better ones to choose any day of the week or year – or for people to Chomp Climate Change all year long:
http://www.chompingclimatechange.org/
Calling for people to reduce their carbon footprint has been widely done for more than twenty years, yet it’s motivated little action. In contrast, emergencies normally motivate major action – and one UN group after another has warned that major action by 2017 may be the last real chance to reverse climate change before it’s too late. So that may be a more compelling cause to promote.
Indeed, Bill Gates was filmed in 2012 saying that he could foresee a big jump in vegan foods in 5 years – i.e., by 2017 – and more recently, he wrote an article on this topic:
http://mashable.com/2013/03/21/bill-gates-future-of-food/“
So glad to see you post this!
I do not believe anyone who says he or she cares about the environment or social justice and continues to eat the flesh and secretions of animals. Going vegan is easier today than ever before, and it is completely necessary.
It may seem difficult at first, but if you just try it for a month, by month two it will be simple.
People like me who are on the internet promoting a vegan diet (and ending speciesism) are happy to help you with any questions you may have, recipes you may want, or difficulties you’re facing.
The best web site for nutrition information is http://www.nutritionfacts.org.
At first, changing habits seems difficult. But after about a month, it will become second nature. Go to the library and get some vegan cookbooks. Listen to this podcast: http://www.compassionatecook.com/publications/food-for-thought-podcast. Watch Forks Over Knives on Hulu (free) or Netflix. Watch Earthlings for free on the internet.
Cheese has an opiate-like effect. It contains casomorphine. At first, it’s hard to give up — I used to love it! But after 1 to 2 months, you will not think of it anymore. Educate yourself on the cruel and disgusting way milk is obtained and it will be even less tempting. Remember, you are stronger than cheese.
There are higher values than taste preferences. It is more important to not destroy the environment and to not harm other creatures than it is to eat what we were raised to eat. Let us form a higher consciousness for our species — one that finally embraces true non-violence and equality for even those who are most different from us, i.e. non-human animals. When we do this, all social inequality is intolerable.
Rather than starting with one day a week or something like that, try it for one month. In that way, your body will have the chance to get used to something different and get the addictive properties out of your system so that at the end of the month, you’ll be better able to make a decision as to what you want to do. During that time, educate yourself. You’re unlikely to fall blindly back into old habits after you’ve learned about all the environmental, health, and ethical reasons to go vegan.
Have a great day!
Very good argument for the vegan cause. As regards changing personal eating habits, this is largely a question of self-education. Meat, and particularly junk foods are addictive. A person can go for years without eating these, and then assimilate them into his or her diet within a matter of days without any notable health problems. On the other hand, once one has gone with no meat for a few weeks, the craving for meat also disappears. In short, it is a question of the will to make the change.
For a completely different solution check out Allan Savory.
his TED talk is a good intro:
http://www.ted.com/talks/allan_savory_how_to_green_the_world_s_deserts_and_reverse_climate_change.html?utm_source=newsletter_daily&utm_campaign=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_content=button__2013-03-04
then check out his website:
http://www.savoryinstitute.com
Good article!
Where does cheese generate all this CO2 I thought it was made from milk?
You’re not wrong, H – but I think the answer is that it is made from quite a lot of milk. 10kg of milk to make 1kg of cheddar, according to folk on the cheese forum:
http://cheeseforum.org/forum/index.php?topic=4475.0
And then there’s all the heating and chilling and storing to factor in. So just over 10x more CO2 than milk doesn’t seem that wide of the mark.