Nearly 10,000 bloggers around the world are taking part in Blog Action Day 2009, discussing this year’s topic, Global Warming, from the perspectives of their individual blogs. Here are my thoughts on meat’s giant carbon footprint.
Mae West once famously said, “Too much of a good thing can be wonderful!” Unfortunately, just about everywhere you look these days, the opposite is proving to be true. Take meat, for instance. America’s growing love affair with meat [and more recently, the developing world’s increasing infatuation with it] is having dire consequences for our health and the health of the planet.
How big is the world’s love of meat? In his 2008 article “Rethinking the Meat-Guzzler,” New York Times food writer Mark Bittman said, “The world’s total meat supply was 71 million tons in 1961. In 2007, it was estimated to be 284 million tons. Per capita consumption has more than doubled over that period. [In the developing world, it rose twice as fast, doubling in the last 20 years.] World meat consumption is expected to double again by 2050.”
What makes these numbers so scary? Consider this. According to Livestock’s Long Shadow, a 2006 report by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, the raising of livestock causes more greenhouse gases than driving cars. In fact, livestock production generates nearly one fifth of the man-made greenhouse gas emissions that are contributing to global warming worldwide. It is also a major source of land and water degradation. Henning Steinfeld, Chief of FAO’s Livestock Information and Policy Branch and senior author of the report, calls livestock “one of the most significant contributors to today’s most serious environmental problems.”
Bittman further states that “an estimated 30 percent of the earth’s ice-free land is directly or indirectly involved in livestock production.” Making the meat we put on our tables—well, making it using the factory production methods that accounts for most of its creation—consumes an inordinate share of resources. In addition to land, “the water needs of livestock are tremendous, far above those of vegetables or grains. An estimated 1,800 to 2,500 gallons of water go into a single pound of beef,” according to Meatless Monday, a non-profit initiative of The Monday Campaigns, in association with the Johns Hopkins’ Bloomberg School of Public Health. By comparison, “Soy tofu produced in California requires 220 gallons of water per pound.” Already, meat production places a huge burden on the planet. As climate changes further affect agriculture, it will only get worse.
A Voice of America article reports that you don’t have to look to the future to see the impact of global warming on food production. Dr. R.K. Pachauri, the head of the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, says there is evidence in India, the world’s second most populous nation, that several crops are actually experiencing declines in yields.
Want to make a difference? Try “Meatless Monday” [or Tuesday or Wednesday or…]
Global warming is a huge and growing problem with many causes. Solving it will take the work and cooperation of governments, industry and individuals. For meat lovers like me, turning your back on Mae West’s “too much of a good thing” philosophy can help make a big difference. You don’t have to give up meat—just eat less of it. This past January, Chicago health commissioner Dr. Terry Mason urged Chicagoans to go meatless for a month, more for health reasons than for fighting global warming. A noble idea, perhaps, but one doomed to failure, I fear. It’s unreasonable to expect meat lovers to quit cold, um, turkey for an entire month.
A much more workable idea is going meatless one day a week. The UN’s Dr. Pachuari embraces the idea, saying, “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.”
Author Michael Pollan is another proponent. In an appearance on Oprah, he said that “Even one meatless day a week—a meatless Monday, which is what we do in my household—if everybody in America did that, that would be the equivalent of taking 20 million mid-size sedans off the road.”
Mark Bittman takes a different approach. Driven by personal health concerns, but unable to become a vegan as his doctor suggested [as a food writer for the New York Times, he has to remain omnivorous to fully cover the topic], he opted for a diet he dubbed “vegan before 6.” From the time he wakes up until dinner, he eats only fruits, vegetables, whole grains and legumes. Then at dinner, he eats pretty much what he wants, which, as he admits, is “normally quite indulgent.” The results have been dramatic. “Within three or four months, I lost 35 pounds, my blood sugar was normal, cholesterol levels were again normal… and my sleep apnea indeed went away.”
And his dietary changes aren’t just good for him. In his latest book, Food Matters: A Guide to Conscious Eating with More Than 75 Recipes, Bittman explains how eating more fruits and vegetables and reducing dependence on processed foods is better for the planet too. As he states in the Times article above, “If Americans were to reduce meat consumption by just 20 percent it would be as if we all switched from a standard sedan—a Camry, say—to the ultra-efficient Prius.”
So what are we doing at Blue Kitchen? Well, we’re not giving up meat, at least not completely. But we are codifying a shift that’s been occurring naturally in our kitchen for some time, to cooking more vegetarian meals. [Marion’s Casserole of Roasted Mushrooms this week is an excellent and delicious example.] Inspired by Blog Action Day and all the mounting evidence of meat’s impact on global warming [and my scribblings here are just the tip of the melting iceberg], we’re going to go officially meatless one day a week. Probably not Mondays—I’m often cooking my posts on Mondays and don’t plan to go totally meatless here on the blog either. And maybe not even a locked-in day of the week. But one day a week, nevertheless. And chances are, you’ll be seeing the fruits [and vegetables] of our efforts here.
Don’t forget to check out what other bloggers have to say on Blog Action Day.
Okay, your turn. We’d love to hear what you think. To vegetarians and vegans, first let me say thanks for lighting the way and giving us inspiration; even those of us not ready to abandon meat altogether can always use great ideas for reducing our intake. Feel free to to link to your favorite recipe here. And to those of you out there who still don’t believe that global warming is real, just shut the hell up.
A fascinating & informative post. Very scary the increase in the amount of meat produced & consumed world-wide. More cattle – more destruction of the last remaining rainforest regions!!! From 71 million tons to 284 currently! And the Chinese haven’t even gone on a meat eating spree!
Here Here!
It’s really not all that difficult to avoid meat one day a week, or even three. I was a vegetarian for 8 years, then had an epiphany on a trip to Provence that I should give up all dogma, including my own. So went back to meat, then did Adkins for a while to shed some pounds accumulated from eating so much grain-food. I’ve landed finally somewhere in the moderate zone, having meat 3 times a week or so.
But substituting with alot of dairy doesn’t get you in the green zone, so beware of that tendency. There’s a world of food out there that doesn’t use any animal products, so if you make the discovery of them as much fun as any other learning, you’ll be pleasantly surprised how easy it is to eat better.
Good eating to all!
Thanks for putting the spotlight on such an important issue. It wasn’t a concious decision, but I usually have at least a third of my meals without meat, probably half of those without dairy. I have to believe that every little bit helps. I’m also big on conserving water since I live in Arizona. (And on planet Earth, since it’s obviously a global problem.) Good post.
Oh, please don’t forget to vote by October 29th for Blue Kitchen for the 2009 Foodbuzz Award for blogger you’d most like to see open his own restaurant at http://www.foodbuzz.com/blogs/1474529-announcing-the-foodbuzz-blog-awards. Well-deserved nomination!
Thanks, Helmut. Happily, there is some good news to be had in this regard. Newsweek magazine recently published its Green Rankings 2009 List, ranking 500 major companies according to their green practices. McDonald’s, the largest buyer of U.S. beef—and indeed, possibly the biggest buyer worldwide—ranked a surprising 22 on the list. Turns out that since 1989, company policy has stated that they will not buy beef from cattle suppliers who destroy rainforests. In addition, they buy fish from sustainably managed fisheries and have agreed not to purchase soybeans that have been grown on recently deforested land in the Amazon.
Karen—You’re right, it’s all about balance. Regarding dairy, though, its carbon footprint is considerably smaller than beef. Recent studies show that the carbon footprint of a gallon of milk has actually fallen over the years, from 31 pounds in 1944 to about 12 pounds in 2007. By comparison, one pound of beef has a carbon footprint of about 36 pounds—quite a difference.
Dani—Yes, water conservation is a huge issue too. When we were in Toronto recently, I was stunned [alarmed?] to learn that 18 percent of the world’s fresh water supply is in the Great Lakes.
Oh, and thanks for reminding people to vote for Blue Kitchen for the Foodbuzz Awards—you’re doing a better job of promoting me than I am!
(That’s because you’re too modest!)
Great posts and comments, Terry. Nice to know even McDonald’s is trying to consider its carbon footprint – with or without special sauce. I’m also a meat eater, but have found myself of late trying to stay vegetarian on weekends. Much less painful than I thought. In fact…kind of enjoying it. Thanks for a thoughtful piece once again.
I’m with ya! I’ve made two changes over the last year or so, although I do fall off (or jump off) the wagon every now and again.
Meat used to occupy about 60% of my plate. Now, it’s more like about 20%, with the occasional celebratory meal.
I also endeavor to eat vegetarian during the day and whatever my wife’s cooking in the evening. That works well for me.
I learned from Harold McGee’s book that meat wasn’t so prominent on the American dinner table until around the 1950’s. The two primary changes were transportation routes became more efficient and, as a result, the retail cost of meat went down. So what happened was meat that was once regarded as something consumed by the wealthy or only on special occasions, was now readily available and affordable for everyday fare.
Kind of like how I feel when my grocery store has shrimp or beef tenderloin on sale. I buy it!
There is a moral issue worth considering too, which my dad taught me as an avid hunter: someone on your food chain lost it’s life so you could go on living–treat it accordingly.
A great comment, Chip! I must admit that when I plan a meal, I often start with the animal protein I have in mind and go from there. One change I’m making, though, is that the meat portions are getting smaller, occupying less of the plate. Your father sounds like a wise man. His lesson is also a reason to buy small farm-raised, organic meat whenever possible. It’s one thing for a creature to give up its life so you can have food—it’s quite another for its entire life to have been one of misery just so it could end up on your plate, as is the case with much factory-farmed meat.
Now that’s a weird concept: meat as a side?
I need to make an addition to my last comment. Also in the 1950s, factory-farming came into being, which also affected availability of meats.
Chip—And if you want to hear something really appalling, according to Toni over at Daily Bread Journal, Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilseck said that “approximately 70% of the food in this country is produced by less than 4% of the farmers. Basically, our food comes from ADM (Archer Daniels Midland), Cargill, IBP (Iowa Beef Producers) and Tyson.”