Are Meat-Eaters Destroying The Planet?
Is Eating Meat Eco Friendly? Should We Convert To Being Vegetarian Or Even Vegan?
There has long been the argument against eating meat - although it covered many aspects it now has another twist. Rather than just worrying about the health of the animals, the cruelty of killing them, the risk of diseases from them and the whole ‘is it healthy’ debate - the new angle is about how eco friendly eating meat is.
For the Vegans, it’s just another string to their bow about the all-good angle of veganism, but are they losing a few points as the argument unfolds. I have just covered a few points from both sides of the fence - so to speak - although I must admit that I lean to one side - but obviously you must decide for yourself.
Cows Verses Corn.
Should we feed our animals with grain that could be feeding humans in the first place? Basically, there are plenty of people who believe that the grain we grow should be eaten by humans rather than processed into food for livestock.
There are many figures showing that the energy and protein derived from eating the grain is greater than the energy and protein that you finally get out of the animal - however it has also been shown that the proteins from meat are more easily digested and cause less damage to the teeth than grains and pulses. You would also need to eat more vegetable matter per unit of protein or energy than meat.
Animals farmed for food have to have large areas of land to roam while alive, therefore reducing even further the amount of land available to grow crops on. Others would argue that many livestock - like sheep and goats - roam in fields that cannot be farmed for anything else so would be ‘wasted’ otherwise.
In addition many animals are fed on plant materials that are not suitable for human consumption - think of your guinea pig in the garden eating the outer cabbage leaves and the ends of your carrots! Therefore, are all livestock competing with humans for food?
In contrast - eco-friendly organic animal farming uses more land than factory farming, so can the cute organic lamb we are all crying out for actually be reducing the amount of food available for humans?
Cattle & Carbon:
Every kg of beef sent to the stores has apparently emitted 14kg of carbon dioxide during it’s lifetime. Even cheese releases around 10kg of carbon per kg! And even milk has churned out around 1kg of carbon per liter produced! So gulping down a glass of the white stuff is damagingthe atmosphere!
These figures are very high, and obviously the intensive farming of lifestock uses a lot of oil in machinery and feeds. The United Nations Food & Agriculture Organisation has recently been quoted as saying that ‘animal farming is eco-hostile’.
There are around 1.3 billion cows on the earth at the moment and the total number of all farmed animals is expected to double to 40 billion by 2050. And we all know that rainforests are being destroyed to make way for some of these animals - therefore causing even more carbon to remain in the atmostphere.
Meat = Methane:
It has been calculated that cows and animal farming are responsible for 18% of human climate change - particularly with their methane emissions. Methane is such a dangerous greenhouse gas in the short term that we should really be reducing the amount of this gas in the atmostphere as it turns into Nitrous Oxide.
To put this in perspective, if carbon dioxide = 1, then methane = 23. Quite a difference! But what if I told your that using that same scale, nitrous oxide would be 296!!!
Although 18% is quoted - in a weird manipulation of the figures - it’s not that bad? Most of the nitogen produced by a cow is held within it’s manure which is usually pumped straight back into the soil to fertilise the next crop - reducing the need for chemical intervention. However, it can also be used for fuel - which can be seen to be reducing the pressures of deforestation to get wood for cooking and heating etc, but the flipside is that burning it actually releases all that stored gas into the sky!
Local Fresh Meat Vs Less Food Miles:
Many vegans eat staple foods like nuts and grains for protein that need to be imported from across the globe. This increases the total food miles of a particular product.
Surely the carbon used in the worldwide transportation of their meat-free foods is adding up somewhere. Don’t forget - the figures given for the energy used to grow a particular crop may not take into account all the fuel, staffing, building and maintenance costs of running a ship or airplane to transport it to your plate.
Packaging for long-distance foods also includes refridgeration techniques, excess protective packaging and ultimately environmental damage. Why not just eat some home-grown meat un-packaged from a local farm shop you walked to instead and save all that waste?
Vegans say that just refusing to eat meat for one day a week is more environmentally friendly than switching to a completely local diet. They really think it’s that bad. Worse than their own food miles.
Opposition would say that reducing our dependance on meat would certainly make a big difference to the global impact of animal farming, but that a totally vegan diet is not as efficient as one containing a small amount of meat and dairy. And getting rid of all farm animals would have a huge knock-on effect for wildlife, humans and plantlife - and would frankly not be feasible.
Is it just a cow?
And don’t forget, farm animals are not just about meat. They give us wool, leather, milk, cheese, manure, transport, traction, security and pet food.
We would have to find substitutes for all of these products - and many if not all of those substitutes will probably involve more oil and plastic - or ironically plant products. And aren’t they all as bad as the livestock we are trying to eradicate?
Nothing is ever just black and white……
.
