I have heard that meat consumption is very bad for the environment, because the animals generate a lot of methane. Is this true, and, if so, how can we limit meat consumption while remaining healthy? Would we need to stop eating meat altogether, or would limiting it be enough? How much meat should I eat each week?
- Anonymous
Humans have been eating meat almost as long as they’ve been, well, humans. But in the last century or so, meat production has changed rapidly in ways that are detrimental to the environment. This change coincides with a dramatic rise in the amount of meat that we in the developed world consume, with developing nations catching up as they become wealthier. This simultaneous increase in quantity and decrease in quality (at least according to environmental metrics) is prompting concern the world over.
Most livestock in the United States is raised in large commercial operations where animals are fed grains whose production requires large amounts of fertilizer, pesticides, fuel, water and land. Not only do chemicals from the fertilizers and pesticides end up in the surrounding air and water, but excess ammonium fertilizer can also escape into the air as nitrous oxide, a powerful greenhouse gas.
Once the feed reaches the animals, matters get worse. Ruminants, which include cattle and sheep (but not pigs or chicken), emit methane, another greenhouse gas, as they digest their food. Then, ruminants and non-ruminants alike produce manure. Traditionally, manure was used to fertilize fields, contributing to agricultural growth without producing a waste problem. Now that livestock production is largely separate from crop production, however, dealing with the waste produced by animals has become a serious challenge for both meat producers and their surrounding communities. When handled improperly, manure can leach into drinking water and releases more nitrous oxide into the atmosphere.
Finally, the transportation and processing of meat both require significant energy and result in additional emissions. Relatively speaking, though, post-farmgate emissions are a small fraction of the overall emissions associated with meat’s lifecycle: in the case of beef, 90% of emissions are generated during production, and that figure stands at 69% for pork.
Animals have different lifecycles, and total environmental impact varies considerably by species. Studies have found that beef results in more than twice the greenhouse gas emissions of pork and almost four times the emissions of chicken.
Fortunately, reducing meat consumption is good for your health as well as the environment. Consumption of red meat is associated with higher rates of heart disease, cancer and diabetes. And while people sometimes worry about not getting enough protein if they eat less meat, protein intake for most age groups in the United States exceeds government recommendations. People looking to cut meat out of their diets entirely can stay healthy by eating more grains, legumes, and vegetables. Of course, there can be health benefits to small amounts of meat consumption, particularly in the developing world where diets are just beginning to shift from low-quality starchy staples to more nutrient-rich fruits, vegetables and meats. The real health issues only come into play when meat is consumed on the scale at which Americans and other Westerners eat it.
Exactly how to change your diet is a matter of personal choice—reducing meat and dairy consumption across the board, switching from high-emission choices like beef to lower-emission choices like chicken, or switching from conventional to grass-fed can all reduce individual carbon footprints. One popular initiative is “Meatless Mondays.”
Eating less meat is no silver bullet, though. Even if the whole U.S. population went vegetarian for a year, our overall carbon emissions would only fall by 4.5 percent, according to a study by the Environmental Working Group (EWG) that measured the environmental impact of meat production. Changes in meat consumption alone won’t prevent future climate change, but that doesn’t mean these actions are worthless; any eventual solution to climate change will involve many small changes, working together. At the end of the day, eating less meat is a good thing, but it is not the only thing that can or should be done.
