This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website.

Are you a vegan and talented at writing? We are looking for a new content writer for our family. Earn & learn.

Beef Consumption and Climate Change – Cut Lamb and Beef to Cut Climate Change

26
0
Beef and Climate Change

Beef and Climate Change

Climate change today is one of the most serious problems, for the solution of which it is necessary to cooperate with all of humanity. The heating of the planet can become an irreversible process, and if nothing is done about it today, tomorrow it will be too late.

Environmentalists have always dealt with forests, water, and beef production and climate change has long been ignored – it seemed that it does not do much harm. From 1989 to 2000, the consumption of animal products in cities almost quadrupled.

Today, according to scientists, 24% of global greenhouse gas emissions are generated by agriculture, of which 14% are from livestock, which exceeds the indicators of all kinds of transport: cause the same harm as meat production. Leaving it as it is, beef consumption and climate change will be responsible for 50% of all human emissions by 2050.

The climate footprint of the beef industry and climate change is 100 times that of plant foods. This is due to fermentation, a digestion process that releases methane, a powerful greenhouse gas, inside the intestines of an animal. The negative impact on the environment is also caused by manure, its storage, and accumulation.

Beef Industry and Climate Change Google Scholar Uf

The worst offenders in the environment are grass-eating animals that produce methane. Cows generate about 16 kg of carbon dioxide for every kilogram of meat. Sheep are also not far behind in this matter, producing 13 kg of carbon dioxide per kilogram of meat.

Beef and Climate Change Facts

Beef and Climate Change Facts

About 26% of the land surface is used only for grazing, which is equivalent to the area of Africa and the EU combined. For this, forests had to be sacrificed, and due to changes in land use, there was a loss of carbon and an increase in the amount of carbon dioxide.

Due to the huge number of livestock, there is a loss of biodiversity. Based on one of the latest studies, The Guardian published an interesting infographic and clearly showed that among the total biomass of mammals, livestock makes up 60%, 36% are people and only 4% are wild animals.

Truth about Climate Change and Eating Beef

A huge amount of resources is spent on climate change and beef production. Beef is especially destructive to the climate: its water footprint is 10 times greater than that of legumes, and its production requires 28 times more land than pork, poultry, eggs, and dairy products combined.

The share of methane from beef cattle and climate change is 44%. The greenhouse effect of methane is 23 times stronger than that of carbon dioxide emitted from burning fossil fuels.

Unlike burning fossil fuels, which emits carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas emitted from meat production is methane, which has a greenhouse effect 23 times that of carbon dioxide. Global contribution Its share of all greenhouse gases from livestock production is 44%.

After methane, almost equal shares are occupied by nitrogen oxide (29%) and carbon dioxide (27%).

Beef and The Paris Agreement: Changing What We Eat to Stop Causing Climate Change

The latest study says greenhouse gas emissions from 13 dairy companies in the world match those of the entire UK. And despite the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement, in which all countries of the world agreed to strengthen their climate targets, emissions increased by 11%, thanks in large part to agriculture.

Doug Boucher Beef and The Paris Agreement: Changing What We Eat to Stop Causing Climate Change

In addition to the fact that livestock farming itself is a very dirty and energy-intensive sector, the human factor also affects environmental pollution – producers often dump waste into nearby water bodies, disrupting the local ecosystem.

Cut Lamb and Beef to Cut Climate Change

Grass-Fed Beef and Climate Change

The population of our planet consumes less and less beef and lamb, while the consumption of pork and poultry is growing. Different types of meat are not equally popular. In general, the demand for beef and lamb is falling in the world. For example, in the United States, the consumption of cattle meat has been declining for three decades: during this time it fell by a third.

Grass-Fed Beef and Climate Change

The one and a half billion cows that, according to the UN, now live on the planet, account for about 18% of all greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, which significantly exceeds the level of emissions of all transport on earth. In general, the report notes, cows account for about a hundred harmful gases, including 2/3 of all ammonia entering the atmosphere (the main cause of acid rain)

Chicken or Beef? Explain The Impact of Dietary Choices and Climate Change

Chickens, which have a mixed diet, are more forgiving of the environment.

In view of the above, from an environmental point of view, it is much better to consume chicken than beef (especially considering the fact that beef requires 10 times more resources). However, what can be puzzling is that the most ecological ones are not domestic or organic chickens, but intensively raised in energy-efficient poultry houses.

Kerala Discussion on Beef and Climate Change

Thus, out of respect for other living beings, many Hindus adhere to a vegetarian diet – mainly its lactovegetarian (dairy-plant) variety. Vegetarianism is one of the important aspects of Hinduism – it is seen as one of the means to achieve a sattvic (pure, blissful) lifestyle.

Eating Beef and How Much to Eat to Avoid Climate Change

Another strategy is to find alternative sources of animal protein. Insects, fish raised on fish farms, and even artificial meat raised in the laboratory are all touted as potential substitutes with significant disadvantages.

Unexpectedly, mussel meat turned out to be the most ecological source of animal protein. Their cultivation requires relatively little energy, besides, they have another, equally important, bonus, namely and storing it in their shells. As a result, the carbon footprint of mussel meat is 20 times less than chicken and 50 times less than beef. Therefore, perhaps to truly reduce our own environmental impact, we should eat more mussel meat.

However, many environmentalists consider the carbon footprint argument less weighty. Indeed, it can help find the most energy-efficient way to produce meat, but it is not the best way to use land and other natural resources.

Do you like this article?
no 0
Comments