Carbon saved by reducing meat consumption
Our consumption of meat typically receives much less attention, if any, than other climate change issues, but meat production is in fact amongst the top three contributors to greenhouse gas emissions. A report by the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations
identified that livestock production was responsible for 18% of global greenhouse gas emissions alone, a proportion greater than all the transport in the world put together.
Once upon a time meat was regarded as a 'special' addition to the weekly diet. Now, due to intensive farming and production methods, as well as people generally being a bit better off than in times past, it is cheap, plentiful, and much more is being eaten than ever before. Our global population has more than doubled over the last 50 years, from 2.6 billion in 1950, to 6.1 billion in 2000,
however meat consumption soared by 5 times over the same period from 45 billion kg to 233 billion kg per year. It is expected to double again to 450 billion kg
by 2050, when the world population will be around 9.3 billion.
Livestock production is also responsible for 37% of global methane emissions, a greenhouse gas that has a global warming effect 23 times greater than CO2, and 65% of global nitrous oxide emissions (mainly due to manure) which has 296 times the global warming potential of CO2. In the US alone, livestock can produce 130 times more excrement than the entire global human population in a single day. In addition the sector accounts for 64% of ammonia emissions, which can lead to acid rain and the acidification of ecosystems.
Of all the farmed animals, of which there are 55 billion worldwide, beef is the most carbon-intensive, producing 34.6 kg of CO2e
per kg of meat.
Quite apart from carbon emissions, there are other serious consequences to meat production. Around 40% of the world's grain goes towards feeding animals
,and farming animals is extremely water intensive, taking 15,000 litres of water to produce a kilo of beef alone, compared with between 400-3000 litres for cereal crops.
So a vast proportion of our land and water goes into producing cheap meat when nearly a billion people are malnourished
, and over a billion people have no access to safe drinking water
. It is also responsible for deforestation, soil erosion, the displacement of local communities, fossil fuel use in farming equipment, fertilisers and transportation, as well as intensive factory farming practices that keep animals in cramped, unpleasant conditions with no exercise, that rely hugely on the over-use of antibiotics (which ultimately we ingest) to stop the spread of disease. Below is further information on the impacts of producing meat.
Let's take a look at the carbon impact of eating less meat:
The emissions due to a kilo of non-organic meat production vary depending on the animal.
Emissions for the four most common types of meat:
1kg beef = 34.6 kg CO2e
1kg lamb = 17.4 kg CO2e
1kg pork = 6.35 kg CO2e
1kg chicken = 4.57 kg CO2e
Creating an average of carbon emission figures:
As there is such a huge difference between the emissions for beef and lamb, and those of pork and chicken, it was decided that taking a straight average would be too simplistic a method of calculating a general carbon saving. Instead, we'll weight the figures according to the popularity of consumption:
According to DEFRA figures,
average weekly consumption of meat products is as follows:
Beef = 128g
Lamb = 54g
Pork = 166g
Chicken = 255g
Total = 603g
Using these figures to create a weighted average:
Beef [(128/603) x 34.6] +
Lamb [(54/603) x 17.4] +
Pork [(166/603) x 6.35] +
Chicken [(255/603) x 4.57] +
Average meat emissions = 12.6 kg CO2 per kg meat
So for one portion of meat:
One serving of meat is:
100g - 175g meat without bone
175g - 350g meat with bone
So weight of an average portion is [100g (boneless) + 200g (on the bone)] / 2 = 150g = 0.15 kg
Carbon emissions saved by not eating a portion of meat = 12.6 x 0.15 = 1.89 kg CO2 = 1.9 kg CO2 approx. per portion.
Other impacts of meat production
Loss of biodiversity
As forests and lands are cleared for meat production, wildlife is under threat as their habitats disappear. The Worldwide Fund for Nature identified that livestock are "a current threat" in 306 of their 825 terrestrial eco-regions. In addition out of Conservation International's 35 "global hotspots for biodiversity", where species are rarely found outside of the hotspot
23 are in danger of serious habitat loss and are affected by livestock production.
It is not only wildlife that is in danger of being driven to extinction. In our quest for high yields of dairy and meat, we are farming only a handful of particular breeds, meaning rarer, less popular breeds are dying out. We are also exporting these breeds to developing countries, even though their local animals have evolved to be suited to the local climate - be it harsh, rugged, drought conditions, or cold, mountainous regions. Animals from other countries are hardly suited to these environments and yet because of their perceived superiority, are sent over and end up replacing local breeds or being cross-bred, and unable to survive the vagaries of their environment. Research by the FAO and UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme) found that one third of farm animal breeds face extinction, and 1000 breeds have disappeared in the last 100 years. They are now being lost at a rate of 2 breeds a week.
Water consumption
Producing livestock places a huge strain on our water supplies. It takes thousands of litres of water to produce just one kilo of beef or lamb, compared with well below a tenth of this for cereals and grain. Consuming meat at the present rate is unsustainable, and scientists presenting at the World Water Week in Stockholm, back in 2004, told the conference that consumption patterns will have to change if the world has any hope of feeding itself in the future. Irrigation for food production uses 70% of our world water supplies, and meat production uses up fresh water supplies in areas which can ill-afford to lose them. Australia for example, has been in the grip of a drought lasting several years,
yet is a net exporter of water in terms of meat.Nearly a billion people are under-nourished, and this number is expected to double by 2025; the challenge will be finding enough water to grow the food that is needed for all of us.
Water pollution
Livestock production is also thought to be the biggest source of water pollution. Pollution from animal waste, antibiotics and hormones, fertilisers and pesticides used for feed, as well as chemicals from tanneries and sediments from eroded pastures, all end up in rivers and freshwater sources. In the US alone livestock production is responsible for over a third of pesticide pollution, a third of nitrogen and phosphorous contaminants and over a half of antibiotics and soil sediments that end up being washed into waterways.
Land use and degradation
A significant issue in meat production are the scale of the resources given over to it. About 26% of the world's land is used for grazing livestock, and another 33% is used to grow the crops and grain to feed them.
In total meat production is responsible for taking up 70% of the world's agricultural land.
The intensive demands have led to deforestation, soil erosion and compaction due to overgrazing, as well as the displacement of local communities. In the Amazon, 70% of previous rainforest land is now covered by pastures, with feed crops occupying a large part of the remaining land
.
Eating less meat and our health
Intensive farming means animals are reared in unnatural environments, indoors with no access to natural sunlight, and often in close, cramped pens or cages that ensure they receive no exercise or quality of life. They are also fed in ways that make them put on vast amounts of weight in an unnaturally short amount of time, and need huge quantities of antibiotics continuously added to their feed to counteract the unsanitary conditions in which they are kept.
Antibiotics, which have been used for decades, encourage antibiotic-resistant bacteria, contributing to drug-resistant diseases in humans and other animals.
Animals in the US can also be treated with growth hormones to make them grow artificially faster, yet the side effects of eating hormone-injected meat are still being investigated and could potentially be very serious, leading to hormone imbalances and even a higher risk of some types of cancer.
Meat forms a huge part of the western diet, much higher than recommended guidelines. The World Health Organisation recommends that adult men should have about 55g of protein a day, and women 45g. Too much saturated fat, found in red meat, can lead to increased levels of cholesterol, raising the risk of heart disease. Too much protein can also leach calcium from bones, leading to osteoporosis, and the rise of fast food restaurants has played its part in rising obesity levels.
Help to reduce meat intake
Advice on healthy alternatives to meat from a nutritional therapist
http://www.familiesonline.co.uk/article/articleview/1565/1/52/
Meat-free recipe ideas
http://www.ivu.org/recipes/
http://www.vegsoc.org/cordonvert/recipes/index.html
http://www.weightlossresources.co.uk/recipes/low_fat/vegetarian.htm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/food/vegetarian_and_vegan/
Footnotes
