| ||||||||||||||||
FOOD'S ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:CLIMATE CHANGEEveryone should have one meat-free day a week to tackle climate change, says UNEveryone should have one meat-free day a week to help save the planet, a leading expert on global warming has claimed. Dr Rajendra Pachauri, who chairs the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, said meat farming produces enormous amounts of greenhouse gases. The environmental scientist, joint winner of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize, said sticking to vegetables once a week would have more beneficial effects than reducing car journeys. 'Give up meat for one day (a week) initially,' the Indian economist recommended. 'In terms of immediacy of action and the feasibility of bringing about reductions in a short period of time, it clearly is the most attractive opportunity.' Read more from The Guardian newspaper, UK. Numerous international studies, such as those by the UN FAO and the Worldwatch Institute, reveal the significant impact of livestock agriculture on a wide range of environmental problems. In 2008 the Worldwatch Institute announced that livestock contribute more to global warming through greenhouse gas emissions than from all forms of transportation worldwide combined (at least 18%, with a 2009 paper reporting it as much higher). Livestock are responsible for 18 percent of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, as measured in carbon dioxide equivalent, which is higher than the share of GHG emissions from transportation. They produce 37 percent of methane, which has more than 20 times the global warming potential of carbon dioxide, and they emit 65 percent of nitrous oxide, another powerful GHG, most of which comes from manure. “Meat Production Continues to Rise,” Brian Halweil, WorldWatch.org August 20, 2008. Video: Ed Hopkins, director of the Sierra Club's Environmental Quality program, discusses the environmental impacts of factory farming. See and learn more at www.platetoplanet.org. Food miles are less important to environment than food choices, study concludes
|
PDFs: Click on any image to download PDF (or the link below it to source) | ||
Why It's Green to Go Vegetarian |
Food-Miles and the Relative Climate Impacts of Food Choices in the US |
Food-Miles and the Relative Climate Impacts of Food Choices in the US |
Livestock's Long Shadow |
Earthsave Global Warming Strategy |
The Global Benefits of Eating Less Meat |
Global Warming Executive Summary |
Eating for the Earth |
Meat, Now It's Not Personal |
Livestock & Climate Change |
Limits to Growth: Facing Food Scarcity |
New York Times: Re-thinking the Meat Guzzler |
On average, animal protein production in the U.S. requires 28 kilocalories (kcal) for every kcal of protein produced for human consumption. Beef and lamb are the most costly, in terms of fossil fuel energy input to protein output at 54:1 and 50:1, respectively. Turkey and chicken meat production are the most efficient (13:1 and 4:1, respectively). Grain production, on average, requires 3.3 kcal of fossil fuel for every kcal of protein produced. The U.S. now imports about 54 percent of its oil; by the year 2015, that import figure is expected to rise to 100 percent.
"Livestock Production: Energy Inputs and the Environment" by David Pimentel
In Canada, 3.5 acres (1.4 hectares) of land is used to feed each person. Most of this land is used for grazing or to grow feed crops. In contrast, only a half acre (0.2 hectares) is required to feed a vegetarian1 — seven times less land.
If the world were to move towards a vegetarian diet, large areas could be returned to wilderness. Unfortunately the opposite is still happening. Witness the ongoing destruction of rainforests to graze cattle and grow soy for animal feed. Considered to be the lungs of the Earth, tropical rainforests produce abundant oxygen, naturally store carbon, and sustain a rich biodiversity, providing a home to countless species of plants, animals and insects. In total, 785 species were driven to extinction in 2007 due to habitat destruction.
Grassland ecosystems are also threatened. About 70 percent of all grazing land in dry areas is considered degraded, mostly due to overgrazing, compaction and erosion attributable to livestock activity.
The vast majority of cereal crops grown in Canada — 77% to be exact — are directly fed to livestock, not people. And, on average, farm animals must be fed over 6 kilograms of crops to produce one kilogram of carcass meat for human consumption.4 Enough food is grown to easily feed everyone on the planet and alleviate high food prices. The problem is that most of it goes to fattening farm animals. Canadians and Americans consume almost 100 kilograms of meat, per person, per year. This involves the killing of 10 billion animals annually.
We're told to conserve water, we should take shorter showers and install low-flush toilets (all good ideas) but in fact agriculture accounts for 87 percent of all the fresh water consumed each year (US). The bulk of this goes toward water required for livestock forage and grain production. Every kilogram of beef produced takes 100,000 litres of water, and broiler chickens take 3,500 liters per kilogram produced. Vegetable crops directly require dramatically less: only 900 litres go into producing a kilogram of wheat, and 500 litres per kilogram of potatoes. Reducing meat in our diet goes a long way towards conserving our precious water supplies.
Animal agriculture is a leading consumer of water resources in the United States, Pimentel noted. Grain-fed beef production takes 100,000 liters of water for every kilogram of food. Raising broiler chickens takes 3,500 liters of water to make a kilogram of meat. In comparison, soybean production uses 2,000 liters for kilogram of food produced; rice, 1,912; wheat, 900; and potatoes, 500 liters. "Water shortages already are severe in the Western and Southern United States and the situation is quickly becoming worse because of a rapidly growing U.S. population that requires more water for all of its needs, especially agriculture," Pimentel observed.
Greater meat consumption and demand for fossil fuels worldwide are expected to cause increasingly more harmful algal blooms and dead zones in coastal and freshwater areas. “Nutrient pollution in aquatic ecosystems, or eutrophication, is a rapidly growing environmental crisis,” said Mindy Selman, the lead author of a new report released today by the World Resources Institute (WRI). “Nearly 500 coastal areas already suffer from hypoxia. Our research indicates that number is expected to rise in the foreseeable future.”
“U.S. could feed 800 million people with grain that livestock eat, Cornell ecologist advises animal scientists,” read the headline for this August 1997 article:
“If all the grain currently fed to livestock in the United States were consumed directly by people, the number of people who could be fed would be nearly 800 million,” David Pimentel, professor of ecology in Cornell University's College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, reported at the July 24-26 meeting of the Canadian Society of Animal Science in Montreal. Or, if those grains were exported, it would boost the U.S. trade balance by $80 billion a year.
Currently some 800 million people on the planet now suffer from hunger or malnutrition, while the majority of corn and soya grown in the world — which could be feeding them, goes to feed cattle, pigs and chickens. By some estimates 20 vegetarians can be fed on the amount of land needed to feed one person consuming a meat-based diet.
Growing crops to feed animals means there is less land on which to grow crops for humans. The knock-on effect of any increase in meat production is likely to reduce the land and resources available for producing other foodstuffs and push future food prices further beyond the limits of affordability for the world's poorest people.
Sir Paul McCartney sums it all up: "If anyone wants to save the planet, all they have to do is just stop eating meat. That's the single most important thing you could do. It's staggering when you think about it. Vegetarianism takes care of so many things in one shot: ecology, famine, cruelty."
“The single action that a person can take, an individual can take, to reduce carbon emissions is vegetarianism...There are many things that people can do to reduce their carbon emissions, but changing your light bulb and many of the things are much less effective than changing your diet, because if you eat further down on the food chain rather than animals, which have produced many greenhouse gases, and used much energy in the process of growing that meat, you can actually make a bigger contribution in that way than just about anything. So, that, in terms of individual action, is perhaps the best thing you can do.”
Dr. James Hansen, NASA Climatologist