Join
Search

Take A Bite (of Meat) Out of Global Warming

Bookmark and Share

What’s the biggest dietary change you can make to reduce global warming emissions? Eat less meat, especially beef. “But I love steak, chicken, and pork,” you say. “There must be another way to fight global warming!” Actually, there is. According to UCS’ new book, Cooler Smarter: A Practical Guide to Low-Carbon Living, eating less meat is just one of the many choices you can make to reduce your personal global warming emissions.

Cooler Smarter: Practical Steps for Low-Carbon LivingThis is part of a series on Cooler Smarter: Practical Steps for Low-Carbon Living.

Take the 20% challenge at CoolerSmarter.org

 

Cooler Smarter urges all Americans to cut back on their global warming emissions by 20 percent this year and offers a menu of practical steps to reach that goal. As the book points out, you can make the biggest difference by first choosing to drive a fuel-efficient car and reduce home energy use. Next on the list, however, is what you eat—and when it comes to food, meat is the biggest climate offender.

Meat and Global Warming Emissions

It turns that the food sector accounts for 14 percent of U.S. global warming emissions and most of that is due to meat. Why is meat such a problem? Let’s start with beef, a trifecta of bad news on the warming front.

Happy cows grazing at the boyhood home of President Thomas Jefferson in Virgina. (Photo by Lance Cheung. Courtesy of USDA)

Happy cows grazing at the boyhood home of President Thomas Jefferson in Virgina. (Photo by Lance Cheung. Courtesy of USDA)

First, the stomach design that allows cows to digest raw plant materials makes them belch out methane, a gas that has 21 times more heat-trapping potential than carbon dioxide.

Second, although capable of thriving on grass, cows are are often gathered into confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs) and fed corn to fatten them up quickly. It takes about 7 pounds of grain to produce one pound of grain-fed beef and the emissions generated in corn production are part of the global warming tally for cows.

Finally, cows in CAFOs produce huge amounts of manure stored on site in piles or lagoons. When manure breaks down, even more methane is produced—yes, by a process similar to what goes on in a cow’s stomach.

Add all that up and it’s no surprise that cows have an outsized impact on global warming. In fact, a pound of beef is responsible for some 18 times the climate emissions of a pound of pasta.

Other meats, chicken and pork, are better choices than beef. Poultry and swine consume grain or other plant food but convert it into meat more efficiently than can cows. Also, their digestive systems don’t produce methane, a big climate plus. Poultry and swine, like cows, are often raised in CAFO’s where stored manure can generate methane, but on balance they are probably “cooler” choices than beef.

You Don’t Need to Become a Vegetarian

We Americans eat a lot of meat…on average 270 pounds per year, nearly 4 times the global average. You don’t need to become a vegetarian or a vegan to make a difference to the climate, just cut down on the amount of meat you eat. Think about something like meatless Mondays. They’ll add up.

What About Pasture-Raised Animals?

Since stored manure produces methane, you might wonder about choosing pasture-raised animals as a climate strategy.

While climate benefits fall on the positive side of the ledger, they may not be the most dramatic environmental benefits of pasture-based operations. According to Raising the Steaks, a recent report by my colleague Doug Gurian-Sherman, pasture-raised animals spread their own manure and so avoid the methane emission produced by stored manure. And well-managed pastures have the potential to sequester substantial amounts of carbon in soil, reducing the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

But whether on pasture or in a feedlot, cows belch methane. In addition, cows (and pigs and chickens) raised in pasture-based systems often take somewhat longer to get to market, and so may generate more climate gasses per pound of meat.

Pasture-raised animals have other benefits. They are so healthy they rarely need antibiotics, providing compelling benefits to public health, and pasture systems can also substantially reduce air and water pollution. (Raising the Steaks)

So yes, pasture-raised beef, pork and chicken are probably cooler choices than CAFO-raised beef. But, sad to say for carnivores, the best way to take a bite out of climate change is to reduce meat consumption, especially beef.

Posted in: Food and Agriculture, Global Warming, Uncategorized Tags: , , , ,

About the author: Margaret Mellon is a respected expert on sustainable agriculture and the potential environmental risks of biotechnology. She holds a doctorate in molecular biology and a law degree. Now a private consultant, Dr. Mellon was the founding director of the UCS Food and Environment Program. The views expressed in her posts are her own.

Support from UCS members make work like this possible. Will you join us? Help UCS advance independent science for a healthy environment and a safer world.

  • http://blog.ucsusa.org/take-a-bite-of-meat-out-of-global-warming Fabio Nunes

    Dear Sirs,

    The suggestion contained in the blog-mentioned publication – eat less meat can contribute to reduce the global warming – seems to have been produced under a very timid, narrow perspective, giving eating less meat, no matter how much one can cut off the meat intake, is nothing compared to the rest of the REAL, IMPORTANT CAUSES behind the US contributions to the global warming emissions. Just a few follow.

    US concentrates just about 5% of world’s population, but consumes 25% of the global energy. Amazing, isn’t it! Cities are built, or were built, without any consideration for the global cost of displacement, a concept from a time when gas was as cheap as bananas, or peanuts and global warming was, in a sense, no more than just hot weather, summer time!

    Public transportation, as a whole, is disastrous IN ANY AMERICAN BIG CITY, with some exceptions, though. Therefore, the entire population depends on the car for everything, even to go round the corner to buy the daily newspaper, because the “around the corner newsstand” is miles away from home.

    Convenience-added everything, a strong driver in the American society, means a lot of plastic, paper, synthetic material, PET bottles being produced to wrap them up while blowing trillion of global warming emissions into the atmosphere.

    A lot, lot of time is spent in front of the TV, instead of being spent outside, working out, for instance, consuming trillions of megawatts and tons of toxic, unnecessary food and drinks, what generates an increasing demand for food and energy.

    Thanks, in part, to a bit of the above, and even more, almost 80% of the American population is over-weight and about 65% is obese. By having the US population to adopt a normal diet, a lot less food, as a whole, not just meats, would have to be produced everyday and, consequently, a lot less global warming emissions would be blown into the atmosphere every year.

    The comments could go further, but I’d better stop!

    Thank you!

Comment Policy

UCS welcomes comments that foster civil conversation and debate. To help maintain a healthy, respectful discussion, please focus comments on the issues, topics, and facts at hand, and refrain from personal attacks. Posts that are commercial, obscene, rude or disruptive will be removed.

Please note that comments are open for two weeks following each blog post. When commenting, you must use your real name. Valid email addresses are required. (UCS respects your privacy; we will not display, lend, or sell your email address for any reason.)