When it comes to global warming, hamburgers are the Hummers of food, scientists say.
Simply switching from steak to salad could cut as much carbon as leaving the car at home a couple days a week.
That’s because beef is such an incredibly inefficient food to produce and cows release so much harmful methane into the atmosphere, said Nathan Pelletier of Dalhousie University in Canada.
Pelletier is one of a growing number of scientists studying the environmental costs of food from field to plate.
By looking at everything from how much grain a cow eats before it is ready for slaughter to the emissions released by manure, they are getting a clearer idea of the true costs of food. The livestock sector is estimated to account for 18 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions and beef is the biggest culprit.
Even though beef only accounts for 30 percent of meat consumption in the developed world it’s responsible for 78 percent of the emissions, Pelletier said Sunday at a meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
That’s because a single kilogram of beef produces 16 kilograms carbon dioxide equivalent emissions: four times higher than pork and more than ten times as much as a kilogram of poultry, Pelletier said. If people were to simply switch from beef to chicken, emissions would be cut by 70 percent, Pelletier said.
How does the beef industry manage to allow this sort of propaganda to continue?
Found by Eric Trytko.
John,
You’re in denial. Read the real statistics. The beef industry puts up millions of tons of methane into the atmosphere every hour of every day. Do the math instead of being a lout. Vegetarianism is one result of accepting responsibility for greenhouse gases. Otherwise, join the Republicans-in-denial. Jerk!
“Yeah, 4-ounces of ground beef does the same damage to the environment as a Hummer.”
Good thing we wiped out the millions of buffalo roaming around North America. They were the cause of the last ice age ending…
Travel,
and how much do humans ADD, on a daily basis..and I think we out number cattle at LEAST 10-1.
I love people that wish to save the planet.
EVEN if we didnt eat the meat. THE cattle would still be there. Do you want to kill ALL THE CATTLE in the world? How about All there ruminant relatives..then you would have killed off 2/3 of the animal life on the planet.
I will ad that leather is MUCH better for the planet then wearing PLASTICS on your feet. I would ask you to look up the pollutants created in making PLASTICS..And they arent CO2 or methane. This is stuff you have to BURY and pray.
So I guess when I go to the drivethru at McD’s in my leather seated Hummer with my girlfreind in her mink coat and order a cheeseburger, I should also order a salad?
Is there some work being done on replacing the gut bacteria in bovines? That could seriously reduce their gas emissions.
Screw the Vegan bastards, I think a big steak is now on for tonight after reading the crap for on e pseudoscientist
#4 Only after clubbing a few baby seals while tossing plastic 6-pack rings in to save the geese in the latest oil slick. 😉
A pinch of research would have led you to note that 4-ounces of ground beef does the same damage to the environment as a Hummer indeed.
http://www.fao.org/ag/magazine/0612sp1.htm
http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/a0701e/a0701e00.HTM
Some food for thought, next time you eat a burger: Half a pound of chicken is .55 pounds of CO2 equivalent. The figures for pork, beef and potatoes are 1.9, 7.4 and .13.
D.
Plants absorb sunlight with a 1% efficiency as primary producer.
Cows eat plants with a 0.01% efficiency as a primary consumer.
Meat IS grossly inefficient, but meat is also a source a great source of nutrients that neither a plant nor the human body can produce.
But eliminating meat doesn’t solve the problem.
Now, let’s say someone’s diet is fish. Are there going to stop being fish if he stops eating them?
Are we going to stop milk production? And the use of leather?
We actually use almost every part of the cow for something productive. And what can’t be used returns to the Earth in the form of fertilizer.
Is it just me, or is the Recent Comments thing on the right side of the page fouled up?
Travel: Oh, yeah? Well you’re a double jerk! You jerky jerk jerkwad!
I’m with Apex- steak tonight!
haha, if cows are such a problem to the ozone, shouldn’t we eat more of them in order to reduce the amount of methane? I would think that eating a salad made up of oxygen producing plants would make the problem of the depleted ozone even bigger…
The reports say we’re past the point of no return for this anthropogenic climate change thing. It doesn’t matter anymore.
I’m going to enjoy my last days with a belly full of steak.
We should all start eating people. I see that as the only real solution for the planet’s woes.
This more anti-business propaganda from the militant greens/vegans…
Oh that’s right…”The debate is over…”
# 13 Dale said, “We should all start eating people. I see that as the only real solution for the planet’s woes.”
Herbivores taste the best. Vegans better hide.
Well a tax on meat is certainly on the agenda, along with a tax on junk foods and of course lawsuits.
There are a lot of sources to support this and other similar matters. Here’s a writer I particularly agree with. He was on NPR last week.
http://www.michaelpollan.com/
This is purely about food, not just trying to convert people to be vegetarians :/
The One knows our hearts and minds! Bow to him!
What I am getting out of this report is that I can enjoy driving in my huge, carbon spewing Hummer if I eat chicken.
Kinda like my own personal carbon credit thing.
John,
It doesn’t mean that you have to eat only Chic-fil-A. You need to go out and kill a steer every once in a while to feel like a Robert Mitchum style man.
A side from my cheap shot this may be the time when all countries have to get used to the notion that the times are changing.
And “no” I am not a vegetarian.
#15 Paddy,
And they should be sacrificed like the animals raised for their fur: with an electric prong up their anuses 🙂
Haven’t these vegans idiots learned from Linda MacCartney that you CAN get cancer and die from it even if you are a strict vegetarian?
If ever a great natural disaster happens that shuts down the food industry, we can always switch to feeding on grain-fed vegetarians. Who knows? With a little bbq sauce it might even taste like good pork.
I’m afraid this is backed by science. Check out the the book by the Union of Concerned Scientists
The Consumer’s Guide to Effective Environmental Choices: Practical Advice from the Union of Concerned Scientists (Paperback)
http://www.amazon.com/Consumers-Guide-Effective-Environmental-Choices/dp/060980281X/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1234823074&sr=8-1
It isn’t about climate change per se, although thats part of it. Beef is pretty much the worst thing to eat from an environmental perspective (land use, water consumption, pollution + carbon usage). Pork is about half as bad, and chicken half again. For lowest impact being a vegetarian is the best.
I’m not a vegetarian, and have no intention of becoming one. But I have cut down on beef, and to a lesser degree pork. Its not hard – and it’s better for your health, and the world.
Why a large group of people throw their hands up and say there is an ‘anti meat agenda’ when someone points out this stuff is kinda sad. It’s childish. It’s throwing your toys out of the pram when someone tells you something you don’t like. Jeez – grow up.
I don’t care. I am still going to eat steak because it tastes good.
If they ban meat, I will just start my own religion where steers are grilled (I mean sacrificed) on an barbecue (I mean altar). Maybe the diners (I mean worshipers) can enjoy a cigarette (I mean holy communion stick) after the meal (I mean service).
I’m afraid this is backed by science. Check out the the book by the Union of Concerned Scientists
The Consumer’s Guide to Effective Environmental Choices: Practical Advice from the Union of Concerned Scientists (Paperback)
It isn’t about climate change per se, although that’s part of it. Beef is pretty much the worst thing to eat from an environmental perspective (land use, water consumption, pollution + carbon usage). Pork is about half as bad, and chicken half again. For lowest impact being a vegetarian is the best.
I’m not a vegetarian, and have no intention of becoming one. But I have cut down on beef, and to a lesser degree pork and chicken. Its not hard. It’s better for your health. It’s also better for the world.
Why a large group of people throw their hands up and say there is an ‘anti meat agenda’ when someone points out this stuff is kinda sad. Or all the ‘brilliant’ eating vegetarian jokes. Yeah, nice one.
It’s childish. It’s throwing your toys out of the pram when someone tells you something you don’t like. Jeez – grow up. Much like the whole climate change discussion frankly…
“Kill it, Skin it, Eat it!”
Found on a cave wall in France
If I switch from meat to vegan beans and rice, my methane emissions are going to soar.
So the extinction of the mega fauna should have caused the planet to cool off and the death of the great bison herds should have done the same?
I don’t think we have any more big plant eaters around today than six hundred or a thousand years ago.
#10 – Olo
>>Is it just me, or is the Recent Comments
>>thing on the right side of the page fouled
>>up?
No, the Recent Comments thing on the right side of the page is fouled up.
I was going to complain about it, but decided to count my blessings instead. At least I don’t get a “DATABASE ERROR ESTABLISHING CONNECTION” every time I come here, like I was getting a while ago.