SOCIAL VEGANS AVOID 'MEET'

American diets (and Western diets in general) tend to lean towards the 'meat lover' on the scale of things (although developing countries are catching up too). 

Where do you think you fit in with the five categories below?

For each of the diets, the results are based on food supply, so it does not take into account the way consumers store and transport the foods. (The methodology for this can be found here.) 

"Reducing the intake of meat and other animal based products can make a valuable contribution to climate change mitigation, other work has demonstrated other environmental and health benefits of a reduced meat diet. National governments that are considering an update of dietary recommendations in order to define a 'healthy, sustainable diet' must incorporate the recommendation to lower the consumption of animal-based products."

Currently, vegetarianism as depicted above, is very high in parts of India with 375 millions of vegetarians. This may be as a direct result of their culture and religion and traditional ideologies in India. On the other hand, those in Western countries like USA and the EU are lagging far behind India with only a few million vegetarians/vegans.

In the average diet animal products make up 60% of emissions despite accounting for just a quarter of food energy.

For the Meat Lover beef consumption causes almost half of emissions from just a tenth of food energy.

In the No Beef diet all the reductions from the Average foodprint come by switching  from beef to chicken.

The difference between the Vegetarian and Vegan diets arises from dairy consumption being switched to a mix of cereals and vegetables.

This data really shocked me, so I thought I had to share it with you! Science shows that becoming vegan is the best way to save our planet and fight global warming. According to the official handbook for Live Earth, reports show that not eating meat is the “single most effective thing you can do.” However, it is very beneficial to precisely lay out the foodprints to get a clearer picture of how one does not have to specifically make the full commitment like those individuals in the Vegucated documentary did. By just substituting a few of the foods you eat most, to foods that produce lower carbon emissions, one can still make a big difference to the environment. The website explains this perfectly;

A Vegetarian’s foodprint is about two thirds of the average American and almost half that of a meat lover. For a Vegan it is even lower. But perhaps most interestingly, eating chicken instead of beef cuts a quarter of emissions in one simple step.

On a happy note, it seems there is definitely a growing portion of the global population who are interested in vegetarian benefits. Below is a chart of page views on Wikipedia for the pages on "Vegetarianism" and "Veganism".

Another incentive to substitute beef with chicken; production of poultry is much cheaper since they take up less space and are more efficient to feed than other livestock. 

So, you will be saving money too!

Happy Meatless Monday! Tune in NEXT MONDAY for THE FINAL POST!

A LITTLE TASTE OF THE OTHER SIDE

HAPPY NEW YEAR EVERYONE!

Thought I'd leave a lighter post for you all to read in the New Year's so let's take a look behind the scenes of your favourite meal at your favourite restaurant. What are the responsibilities of chefs and how are they related to improving social awareness of what is 'good' for you and what is 'bad'?

The Social Responsibilities of Chefs:

http://elitedaily.com/life/culture/social-responsibility-chefs-consumers/618763/

AS THE ROMANS SAY, "RARA SUNT CARA". RARE IS VALUABLE. (CHINA)

The changes in diet occurring in China carry rippling effects around the world. What China’s hungry for makes a difference, said Janet Larsen of the Earth Policy Institute, adding that, “when a few people jump it may cause a ripple, but when a billion people jump, it’s a major shockwave.”

This week, we will be momentarily going back in time in China to compare eating habits in the past to today's eating habits.

Sorry, it might not be all that fancy...

Last week we focused on the consumption trends in USA, this week we are focusing on an even bigger area and an even bigger problem. China now eats twice as much meat as the United States. This is evident in the diagram below. Meat consumption in China is increasing for various reasons and we will be inspecting the main reasons for this trend in today's post. 

Meat consumption compared between China and U.S.

China in 1980's:

Meat was seen as a luxury; each Chinese ate just 13kg of meat, the equivalent to one tenth of a pig a year. On the other hand, beef was so rare it was nicknamed "Millionaire's meat". 

As China started to emerge from a state of poverty, meat consumption increased. As the Romans say, "Rara Sunt Cara", Rare is valuable. Since China's incomes were, and still are increasing many traditional Chinese foods are being switched to the 'luxury foods'. Instead of rice, individuals are replacing this with meats. Beginning in the 1980s, officials enacted measures to promote livestock production, including support for development of a feed-milling industry and subsidized imports of more productive animal breeds. Such incentives has led to incorrect information in the economy and incorrect incentives; individuals became more enthusiastic about livestock production and began to see it positively.

Dinner would probably look something like this in 1980's

China today:

Currently, China is a big player not only on the demand side, but the supply side too. “China produces and consumes about half of the pork in the world,” Schuele said." Consumption and demand of meat is increasing as low income families gradually climb the ladder up to become middle income families. The meals an average Chinese middle income family is eating now, would be a feast to their parents. 

Moreover, Meat consumption is doubling every 10 years." In all, the country now eats more than 60m tonnes of meat a year; equivalent to 240 million cows, or 600 million pigs, or 24 billion chickens. These facts suggest a very large scale problem that is arising not only in the respects of greenhouse gases emitted in the process but also feed needed for the livestock. Since meat consumption is increasing, it has led to individuals noticing this trend and moving towards setting up small farms. A shift in those with household and small farm productions to larger scale meat factories. This seems to be showing a cyclical trend, in which higher demands lead to higher supply and this reduces prices, such that demand can increase even more.

A meal in China today

Benefits:

So far we have focused on the trends in meat production and consumption in China. Having read my previous posts, one can assume that the increasing trends are detrimental to the planet. It is true in some respects, but on a micro level, it has actually shown a big improvement to the Chinese people's lives.

In lifting 300 million people out of poverty over the past 30 years, China also saw an improvement in diets that made the country healthier. According to the World Food Programme, a six-year-old boy today in China is 6kg heavier and 6cm taller than his counterpart at the start of economic reforms in 1978.

Although it may be true that the health conditions of the people in China may have improved, this correlation may not be directly as a result of the consumption of meat. It could be argued that due to increasing incomes, families can now afford to buy more varieties of foods. In poorer areas of China, families may be eating the exact same foods at each meal; this means the nutrients absorbed would be very limited. By having higher incomes, more varied vegetables could be introduced into the Chinese diet instead of putting emphasis on the role of meat.

Beef:

Beef has not become as popular in China because cattle in feedlots gobble up about 7 pounds of grain for each pound of weight gain. For pigs, the feeding ratio is 3 to 1, and for chickens it is 2 to 1. With one fifth of the world's population and limited land and water supplies, China has had to rely heavily on the more-efficient forms of animal protein. 

This is good news for the environment since beef is the biggest contributor to global warming as discussed in previous posts. On the other hand, other meats have been a big hit in China instead.

Pork:

Over half of the world's pigs now live in China. By the end of the year, it is projected that there will be almost twice as many pigs in China as people in America. In the last few decades, China has developed the world's largest pork industry to feed a rising middle class. A quickly rising appetite for pork in China has fueled the sudden jump in production. In mid 1970s, an average Chinese citizen ate 8kg of pork a year. Now, each person eats about 39kg of pork a year. 

China has now overtaken American pork consumption

Poultry:

Poultry production never existed prior to 1978. Chicken flocks in China have grown rapidly. Since the raising of chickens are much simpler and easier than raising ruminants, China has been a big producer of Chickens. The demand and consumption of poultry is also growing.

Although some may perceive that consuming poultry is not as bad for the environment since chickens do not emit methane the way ruminants do, the main environmental concerns are derived from the chicken feed. According to earth-policy.org, more than 60% of the world soybean exports, nearly all from the United States, Brazil and Argentina, go to China. These crops are very often grown in highly unsustainable conditions; ways which involve deforestation which leads to a reduction of biodiversity. 

Sorry, you just can't win either way I'm afraid.

Happy Meatless Monday! Tune in next Monday for a new post on UK meat consumption trends!

WELL, MAYBE THERE ARE ULTERIOR MOTIVES TO TURNING VEGETARIAN...

On a lighthearted note... 

9 Reasons why Vegetarians Make Awesome Girlfriends

GET VEGUCATED

This week I came across a documentary which highlighted the journey of a few Americans changing their American diets to a vegan diet. Being able to see Americans go from one extreme to the other; being heavy meat eaters and transitioning to clean plant based palettes is actually very inspiring.

The journeys show how each person from varying backgrounds went through ups and downs through the transition phase and dictates the possible trip ups we may face which are all rather understandable.

Take a look at the documentary to see how they change their diets and the explanations on environmental impacts but also, whether livestock production is as humane as we imagine!


If you only want to see the environmental impact explanation only, skip to 35.00mins! 

Happy watching!

Perhaps even UCL should get vegucated!!

These are some posters I spotted around UCL...

Although the information may be true, and of course we should all think twice before using up resources, but I have never EVER come across a poster in canteens to say 'Did you know of the impacts of choosing this meal of steak and chips?'

GLOBAL WARMING CONCLUSIONS

After our discussion on the main contributors to global warming and environmental change, here is a wrap up of what we can possibly conclude from research and data.

Possible conclusions and predictions:

Overall, the increasing global demand for meat is most likely to negative effect the environment. 

1) Demand

Since the demand for meat is increasing (perhaps even exponentially) through developing countries, increase in incomes, population growth and urbanisation, the amount of livestock would probably increase since suppliers and those in the industry will see this as a profitable opportunity. Predicted by WHO, annual meat production is projected to increase from 218 million tonnes in 1997 - 1999 to 376 million tonnes by 2030.

2) Supply - Large scale production

Since more space will be needed for large scale production of meat, whether it is areas for the livestock to live and graze, but also slaughter houses. This means there are implications for these processes to become more closely located to urban centres. By being in close proximity with urban centres, a range of environmental and health risks will potentially exist, such as those mentioned before. Land and water requirements would lead to a degradation and depletion of resources. 

3) Urbanisation and development

Due to urbanisation, development in certain countries and technological improvements, transportation of meats are becoming more efficient. This has also spurred on a 'taste for meat'  This is evident in city dwellers who have a varied diet rich in animal proteins and fats, and characterized by higher consumption of meat, poultry, milk and other dairy products. This can be seen in the table below. There is a significant increase in meat consumption in Brazil and China. However it can be seen that the consumption in North America and other developed countries remain at a much higher level. 

Per capita consumption of livestock products

Region	Meat (kg per year)			Milk (kg per year)
	1964 - 1966	1997 - 1999	2030	1964 - 1966	1997 - 1999	2030
World	24.2	36.4	45.3	73.9	78.1	89.5
Developing countries	10.2	25.5	36.7	28.0	44.6	65.8
Near East and North Africa	11.9	21.2	35.0	68.6	72.3	89.9
Sub-Saharan Africaa	9.9	9.4	13.4	28.5	29.1	33.8
Latin America and the Caribbean	31.7	53.8	76.6	80.1	110.2	139.8
East Asia	8.7	37.7	58.5	3.6	10.0	17.8
South Asia	3.9	5.3	11.7	37.0	67.5	106.9
Industrialized countries	61.5	88.2	100.1	185.5	212.2	221.0
Transition countries	42.5	46.2	60.7	156.6	159.1	178.7

^a Excludes South Africa.

Source: Adapted from reference 4 with the permission of the publisher.

As shown, the global demand is increasing in general, but is especially prominent in the BRICS, the five main emerging national economies which represent the trend in growing meat demand within countries with increasing income and wealth. 

The flip side

Although meat consumption can be seen to be increasing in the BRICS, it has actually stagnated in the U.S. according to Business Insider. Perhaps it can be argued that more educated and industrialised the countries are, despite having seen a rapid increase in meat production since 1950s, it has recently stagnated. For example, in the U.S., consumption has dropped by 9% from 2007 to 2012. This could be due to low-meat trends, and more educated consumers who are more concerned with the source of the meats. Furthermore, due to the horse meat scandal which was marketed as beef in early 2013, consumers have become more cautious about what they are eating and the credibility of food labels.

Conclusions:

Perhaps the key conclusion here, is trying to educate consumers on the health risks, environmental risks and the reality of how livestock are treated which can then reduce demand for meat. Although policy measures can be put into place to help reduce the harmful effects, consumers also play a big part too.

According to www.virtualcentre.org, the best way to improve efficiency is to price natural resources with the externalities considered. This is because when public resources are underpriced, it causes overexploitation. As a result, such a pricing strategy is able to allow individuals who use the resources to be mindful of the real cost of its usage.

Efforts here can lead to large and multiple payoffs.

Possible solutions:

To reduce greenhouse gases that have been and will be emitted as a result of the livestock sector, a few solutions have been raised in 'Livestock's Long Shadow':

• Restore historical losses through conservation tillage
• Agroforestry (a more sustainable land use system in which trees or shrubs are grown around or among crops to promote more healthy, sustainable and productive land usage)
• Restoration of desertified pastures
• Methane emissions: improved diets to reduce enteric fermentation, improved manure management, biogas
• Nitrogen emissions: improved diets and manure management
• Use tradable rights for natural resources
• Remove damaging subsidies and alter the price for the resources in order to take into account the environmental externalities

How can we move on from here?

Educate yourself about meat production and consumption. So stay tuned... *wink

 

Happy Meatless Monday! Tune in next Monday for a new post on the consumption patterns by country!

BIODIVERSITY

"Conservation International has identified 35 global hotspots for biodiversity, characterized by exceptional levels of plant endemism and serious levels of habitat loss. Of these, 23 are reported to be affected by livestock production."

So, what is habitat destruction?

THIS IS HABITAT DESTRUCTION.

Habitat destruction is altering the environment in which organisms live such that the conditions of the environment is no longer fit for their requirements. This may lead to them moving to other more suitable areas that suit their needs to survive, or could ultimately lead to extinction. Habitat destruction is currently ranked the highest in causing animal extinction worldwide.

Although the above quote suggests that 23 out of 35 of the global hot spots for biodiversity is affected by livestock production, the website does not then go on to explain how the country is classified as 'affected' and does not include an explanation as to how it is measured. Nonetheless, it is a very significant figure and should not be ignored.

World Conservation Union (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species shows that most of the world's threatened species are suffering habitat loss where livestock are a factor.

If you're interested, hop onto the website: http://www.iucnredlist.org/ and refine your search by changing the categories (to find out about livestock production affects, choose the option 'Threats' and then choose 'Agriculture').

Possible solutions:

Wild areas need to be protected as much as possible, either through buffer zones which can protect a conservation area or civil or criminal penalties. An example of this is the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 written by the Australian Government under the Department of the Environment. They have enforcement mechanisms for suspected non-compliances which include such penalties to deter individuals or corporations from harming biodiversity. 

Additionally, more incentives should be created by the government, for example through subsidies which can help the livestock producers to be more willing to conserve such areas and protect biodiversity.

Happy Meatless Monday! Tune in next Monday for a new post on a wrap up of the environmental harm of livestock

WATER'S YOUR PROBLEM?

A new report from FAO says livestock production contributes to the world's most pressing environmental problems, including global warming, land degradation, air and water pollution, and loss of biodiversity.

This week I was able to cosy up to read 'Livestock's Long Shadow: Environmental Issues and Options'; a United Nations report released by the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations. So far we have focused on the issues surrounding greenhouse gas emissions as a result of meat production and the responsibility of the consumers in contributing to the meat consumption and trend. 

Having read the report, it has highlighted a few important things on the correlation between the livestock sector and global environmental change. I will be writing about other vital environmental problems related to meat production in later posts, and will be looking at possible solutions outlined by the report. These solutions are mainly focused on the technical and political levels in reducing the environmental harm that has and will be caused as a result of meat production.

Today we will touch upon water use and the solutions from a political level to cover how global environmental change can be reduced.

The world is slowly opening their eyes to more issues from freshwater shortage, scarcity and depletion. 64% of the world'spopulation is expected to live in water-stressed basins by 2025. Thelivestock sector accounts for up to 8% of the global human water use (mainly through irrigation for feedcrops).

i) Water Overuse

It is estimated that it takes 2,500 gallons of water to produce one pound of meat (about 5-8 servings of meat). For comparison it takes only 25 gallons of water to produce one pound of wheat (enough to make one loaf of whole wheat bread). Irrigation for feed crops contributes significantly to this overuse of water. Soy and corn are heavily irrigated crops in the U.S. and are used extensively for livestock feed. Most of the grain produced in this country is for livestock production.

Since a large proportion of the grain produced is feed for livestock shows precisely how the grains could be instead, directly created into food for humans. Thus the extra step of feeding livestock (along with the negative environmental impacts associated) could be skipped. 

ii) Water Contamination and Pollution:

The main contributors to water pollution include animal waste, antibiotics and hormones, chemicals from tanneries, fertilisers and pesticides used in feed production and sediments from eroded pastures.

Livestock operations overuse water and may lead to water contamination. The large amount of waste pro­duced on factory farms exceeds the capacity of nearby cropland to absorb it. As a result, manure goes from being a valuable agricultural resource to what is essentially toxic waste. Nitrates, heavy metals, and antibiotics present in manure can seep into groundwater and pollute surface water. Furthermore, when manure lagoons leak or burst, again, nitrates become exposed to the water we drink. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has warned that E. Coli, salmonella, and Giardia found in dairy cattle waste can contaminate drinking water and cause acute gastroenteritis, fever, kidney failure, and even death. It not only affects humans,  but also the sea animals too. There have been numerous instances where this has killed off thousands of fish. No wonder people are saying fish are becoming more scarce!

Water pollution leads to fish death

Water pollution can lead to several undesired results, it contributes to eutrophication; a process where water bodies receive excess nutrients that stimulate excessive plant growth. It could also lead to "dead" zones/hypoxia in coastal areas, this is causes regions of water that lack oxygen necessary to support animal life and as a consequence, become a cause for extinction. Not only does water pollution affect animal life, but also degrades coral reefs. Apart from affecting animals and plants, water pollution causes human health problems due to reusing water in the water cycle and can cause an emergence of antibiotic resistance.

Livestock also affects the replenishment of freshwater by compacting soil, reducing infiltration, degrading the banks of watercourses, drying up floodplains and lowering water tables.

Please save us...

How can water pollution be avoided?

The best way to mitigate water pollution would be to better manage animal waste. This is important as animal waste can cause excess nutrients and pathogens to enter and harm water quality; instead the waste could be reused as a natural fertiliser for crops. Furthermore, better diets for the livestock can improve nutrient absorption.

Possible solutions:

Since water pollution is a problem for not only plants and animals, but humans too, it means humans should put more care into reducing water pollution where possible. I have broken down some possible solutions in improving efficiency of water  use. The first solution is to improve the efficiency of irrigation systems such that there are no unnecessary water losses.

The fact that water is often free and easily available causes the 'free rider effect' used in Economics, where a resource may be over exploited since it is priced at 0. To avoid this, water should be priced at a level that takes the externality into account. Similarly, there should be regulatory quantitative frameworks to limit usage. 

To reduce concentrated areas of livestock rearing especially near cities, zoning regulations and taxes can help to control this. As a result, the harmful effects on human health can be restricted too. 

Happy Meatless Monday!

Tune in next Monday for a new post on Land Degradation.

MAYBE WE'RE WRONG? NITROUS OXIDE DEBATE

Nitrous oxide is about 300 times more potent as a global warming gas than carbon dioxide. According to the U.N., the meat, egg, and dairy industries account for a staggering 65 percent of worldwide nitrous oxide emissions.

Nitrous oxide has been pinpointed as third most important contributor to global warming. Extensive research shows that large quantities of nitrous oxide is emitted as a result of livestock. This is evident in numerous scientific literature such as in the Soil Biology and Biochemistry journal, page 597, 'Nitrous Oxide Emissions from soils due to inputs of nitrogen from excreta returned by livestock on grazed grassland in the UK.'

There are also very detailed explanations on the N₂O emission calculations for each component of livestock production systems, i.e. animal houses, manure stores, following application of manures to land and during grazing in 'Atmospheric Environment', under 'A UK inventory of nitrous oxide emissions from farmed livestock'. If you are interested in the statistics related to each of these stages in the livestock production, head over HERE!

Naturally, nitrous oxide is emitted. This can be seen in the nitrogen cycle as shown below:

The actual nitrous oxide is emitted through feed production and the management of the manure. The former occurs due to the nitrogen based fertilisers used in the soil which leads to nitrous oxide releasing in the atmosphere.

According to new research however, Professor Klaus Butterbach-Bahl from the Atmospheric Environmental Research Division of the KIT Institute of Meteorology and Climate Research (IMK-IFU) in Garmisch-Partenkirchen said, 'this was a big error'.

Founded by scientists from the Atmospheric Environmental Research Division of the KIT Institute of Meteorology and Climate Research, studies in China show that livestock breeding does not lead to an increase in nitrous oxide. “In fact, areas not used for livestock breeding emit much larger amounts of nitrous oxide over the year.” 

The website also states that nitrous oxide emissions have been overestimated by 72%.

Supported by the 'Nature study' shows evidence pointing towards the link between grazing and the reduction in nitrous oxide emissions in some areas. 

Despite this opposing view on whether livestock is the root cause of nitrous oxide emissions or not, increasing nitrous oxide in the atmosphere is still a fact, and nitrous oxide is being emitted due to human-related agricultural factors.

Furthermore, Authors of the paper, published in Nature, say the research does not mean that producing livestock to eat is good for the environment in all countries. However in certain circumstances, it can be better for global warming to let animals graze on grassland.

What do you think?

Happy Meatless Monday! Tune in next Monday for a new post on Water Usage