Livestock contributes to global warming

[Crvena zvezda]

Bad news it seems to fight global warming vegetarianism is the future

Humans' beef with livestock: a warmer planet

American meat eaters are responsible for 1.5 more tons of carbon dioxide per person than vegetarians every year.

By Brad Knickerbocker | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor As Congress begins to tackle the causes and cures of global warming, the action focuses on gas-guzzling vehicles and coal-fired power plants, not on lowly bovines.
Yet livestock are a major emitter of greenhouse gases that cause climate change. And as meat becomes a growing mainstay of human diet around the world, changing what we eat may prove as hard as changing what we drive.
It's not just the well-known and frequently joked-about flatulence and manure of grass-chewing cattle that's the problem, according to a recent report by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Land-use changes, especially deforestation to expand pastures and to create arable land for feed crops, is a big part. So is the use of energy to produce fertilizers, to run the slaughterhouses and meat-processing plants, and to pump water.
"Livestock are one of the most significant contributors to today's most serious environmental problems," Henning Steinfeld, senior author of the report, said when the FAO findings were released in November.
Livestock are responsible for 18 percent of greenhouse-gas emissions as measured in carbon dioxide equivalent, reports the FAO. This includes 9 percent of all CO2 emissions, 37 percent of methane, and 65 percent of nitrous oxide. Altogether, that's more than the emissions caused by transportation.
The latter two gases are particularly troubling – even though they represent far smaller concentrations in atmosphere than CO2, which remains the main global warming culprit. But methane has 23 times the global warming potential (GWP) of CO2 and nitrous oxide has 296 times the warming potential of carbon dioxide.
Methane could become a greater problem if the permafrost in northern latitudes thaws with increasing temperatures, releasing the gas now trapped below decaying vegetation. What's more certain is that emissions of these gases can spike as humans consume more livestock products.
As prosperity increased around the world in recent decades, the number of people eating meat (and the amount one eats every year) has risen steadily. Between 1970 and 2002, annual per capita meat consumption in developing countries rose from 11 kilograms (24 lbs.) to 29 kilograms (64 lbs.), according to the FAO. (In developed countries, the comparable figures were 65 kilos and 80 kilos.) As population increased, total meat consumption in the developing world grew nearly five-fold over that period.
Beyond that, annual global meat production is projected to more than double from 229 million tons at the beginning of the decade to 465 million tons in 2050. This makes livestock the fastest growing sector of global agriculture.
Animal-rights activists and those advocating vegetarianism have been quick to pick up on the implications of the FAO report.
"Arguably the best way to reduce global warming in our lifetimes is to reduce or eliminate our consumption of animal products," writes Noam Mohr in a report for EarthSave International.
Changing one's diet can lower greenhouse gas emissions quicker than shifts away from fossil fuel burning technologies, Mr. Mohr writes, because the turnover rate for farm animals is shorter than that for cars and power plants.
"Even if cheap, zero-emission fuel sources were available today, they would take many years to build and slowly replace the massive infrastructure our economy depends upon today," he writes. "Similarly, unlike carbon dioxide which can remain in the air for more than a century, methane cycles out of the atmosphere in just eight years, so that lower methane emissions quickly translate to cooling of the earth."
Researchers at the University of Chicago compared the global warming impact of meat eaters with that of vegetarians and found that the average American diet – including all food processing steps – results in the annual production of an extra 1.5 tons of CO2-equivalent (in the form of all greenhouse gases) compared to a no-meat diet. Researchers Gidon Eshel and Pamela Martin concluded that dietary changes could make more difference than trading in a standard sedan for a more efficient hybrid car, which reduces annual CO2 emissions by roughly one ton a year.
"It doesn't have to be all the way to the extreme end of vegan," says Dr. Eshel, whose family raised beef cattle in Israel. "If you simply cut down from two burgers a week to one, you've already made a substantial difference."

[Susi]

... It's just the American guilt complex.

If they didn't drive such huge, gas-guzzling, environment destroying cars, they wouldn't have to worry about the contribution of livestock...

[Crvena zvezda]

Actually. I saw a report on tv and it said that if some one was to become a vegetarian and then buy a Hummer they would decrease their emission of greenhouse gases. Basically it seams that the future is one of two things - vegetarianism or more efficient breeds of livestock.

[Susi]

I was a vegan.

It was unhealthy for me, because I was sick more often, was deficient in many necessary vitamins and minerals, and I always felt tired.

Eating meat has made me gain a little weight but otherwise I feel a lot better.

We are naturally omnivorous, that is why we have canine teeth. So perhaps if we eat less meat (the serving size of meat is about the size of a small deck of cards), then things will get better...

[Crvena zvezda]

Originally Posted by Susi

I was a vegan.

It was unhealthy for me, because I was sick more often, was deficient in many necessary vitamins and minerals, and I always felt tired.

Eating meat has made me gain a little weight but otherwise I feel a lot better.

We are naturally omnivorous, that is why we have canine teeth. So perhaps if we eat less meat (the serving size of meat is about the size of a small deck of cards), then things will get better...

I don't condone vegetarianism, I love meat. I do agree if people want to fight global warming there should be more efficient live stock -- like the mini cow from Brazil. I believe in global warming and I know I probably will never do anything to prevent it, so I will never be a vegetarian. Plus, eating meat is good it helps brain development -- if you accept evolution then evolution shows us the human brain starting becoming non-naimal when humans started eating meat.

[Erasmus]

Carnivore, the Führer was a vegan!

[Menydh]

The way it is explained, it sounds even serious. But is it?

Originally Posted by Crvena zvezda

Plus, eating meat is good it helps brain development -- if you accept evolution then evolution shows us the human brain starting becoming non-naimal when humans started eating meat.

I believe that the theory is that human brain development occured parallel to humans inclusion of meat in their diet. I don't know if that means that current meat consumption helps brain development (which I would assume that it would be a development in generations, not in individuals), but it does seem as if many vegetarians are actually insane:

Originally Posted by Erasmus

Carnivore, the Führer was a vegan!

[Marcus Marulus]

There was even a theory that cows' fart contributes to global warming and to the destruction of the ozone layer.


Pseudo-science abounds these days.

[Marcus Marulus]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

The way it is explained, it sounds even serious. But is it?

I believe that the theory is that human brain development occured parallel to humans inclusion of meat in their diet. I don't know if that means that current meat consumption helps brain development (which I would assume that it would be a development in generations, not in individuals), but it does seem as if many vegetarians are actually insane:

There are many cultures in which people don't include meat in their diet, usually not for "moral" reasons, but simply because they cannot afford it.

[Susi]

Well one doesn't need a whole lot of meat for nutrition...

[Crvena zvezda]

Originally Posted by prometheus

There was even a theory that cows' fart contributes to global warming and to the destruction of the ozone layer.


Pseudo-science abhounds these days.

That's actually true. Every time a cow farts, releases excriments or opens it's mouth it releases gases that contribute to global warming.

[Susi]

So, everytime a human farts, releases excrement, or opens his mouth, he releases the same gases.

Same with every other animal with a similar digestive/excretory system (and it doesn't need to be too similar). Hel, I'm pretty sure an amoeba has a similar waste disposal.

[Crvena zvezda]

Originally Posted by Susi

So, everytime a human farts, releases excrement, or opens his mouth, he releases the same gases.

Same with every other animal with a similar digestive/excretory system (and it doesn't need to be too similar). Hel, I'm pretty sure an amoeba has a similar waste disposal.

Yes thats also true. I remember there was a South Park episode making fun of that fact. But in the cow it's worse since they release about 300+ times more then humans.

[Susi]

You forgot about human technology.

[Menydh]

Next one should find out if there is a noticeable difference in the level of polution release by cows fed traditionally and cows-on-steroids.

[Carnyx]

Ah, doesn't it remind you of the reason why the dinosaurs have been said to get extinct?