My response to all this hoopla, aside from sticking my fingers in my ears and whistling assorted Disney classics, has been to think about ways in which each of us as responsible citizens can contrive to make the world a better and more equitable place by adjusting our own lives in very simple and easy ways. If politicians and businesses are going to contrive to destroy the world then we ought to make it as difficult as we can by living our lives as sustainably as possible. That way when Armageddon comes and molten rock is falling from the sky you can die in the knowledge that if there is a heaven you won't be forced to share it with Lord Monckton and his Gollum eyes.
Food, as many of you will know, is a big passion of mine and I often excercise my interest to irritating extremes. Recently, however, I have been making a conscious effort to alter my food intake considerably by eating much less meat and fish than I would ordinarily. Now I love meat, properly love it. I will go purposely out of my way to look around a butchers, not to buy anything but just to experience that wonderful odour of good quality, well-aged produce. Meat is like food porn, and the sight of an expertly jointed rolled pork shoulder is enough to awaken something primal in me. So cutting down on the amount of meat in my diet is rather like asking an alcoholic to switch to shandy.
However, I think a growing number of people are aware of the importance of not only choosing their meat more carefully, but limiting their intake altogether. Thanks to Mr. Fearnley-Whittingstall's latest campaign, and the activities of some very important organisations, the meat debate is squarely in the political mainstream. However, when it comes to the reasons behind such a shift in public opinion people are more hazy, particularly in the link between meat production and the environment. This blog is intended, therefore, to provide some insight into this and explain exactly why we should be thinking very carefully about the things we put in our mouths.
To briefly summarise, eating less meat can be beneficial in five specific ways: it minimises the suffering of animals, curbs deforestation, particularly of the Brazilian rainforest, produces less greenhouse gas emissions, allows room for less intensive farming practises, and improves the health of people. Food systems are inextricably linked to the environment and, in an era of globalised trade, are also an inextricable link between populations. By altering the way the world consumes meat, the planet can be a more equitable, healthier and sustainable place to live.
Animal Suffering: Now I'm not going to get into an philosophical argument here about whether it is morally right or wrong to kill animals. I eat meat, and don't consider doing so a crime. What I abhor, however, is the cruel and inhumane methods used to cultivate much of the world's meat produce. In a circumstance where you cannot be sure of the provenance of an animal or the condition in which it was kept you should avoid it. I'm not going to argue this but assume it as a self-evident fact and unless you're emotionally bankrupt you should agree with me. If this means eating less meat and buying better quality then all the better.
Globally we use around 60 billion animals every year in the production of food. That's about 9 animals per person providing us with milk, cheese, eggs and of course meat. On current trends, this number is projected to double by 2050 as the world's population edges over the 9 billion mark. In reality, meat production is set to grow much higher as developing countries demand ever greater amounts of meat for its citizens. China, for example, now consumes more than half of the world's pork and has swiftly moved from being a predominantly vegetarian society to an increasingly affluent omnivore. With such a surge in demand, the logical and myopic answer in the market will be to increase yields by intensifying meat production. For want of available land and resources, this will necessitate an increase in unethical indoor farming.
I don't think I need to go into the practises of intensive indoor farming and exactly why I'd like to subject some of the owners of these businesses to similar treatment, but suffice to say the suffering caused to animals is unimaginable. Often they cannot move and become deformed, they develop sores which are not treated, they are fed a diet of soy, antibiotics and hormones and forced to grow as quickly as possible, and they are then slaughtered to produce sub-standard pre-packaged cuts of meat. Put simply, cheap and plentiful meat means more pain for millions of animals and a worse tasting product on your plate.
Deforestation: To meet the demands of buoyant meat-hungry populations, not only will more intensive farming be required, a continuation and increase in deforestation is also a necessity. Mankind already uses about 75% of the world's available land, and, in the scramble for ever more pasture and arable land, forests have been particularly hard hit. Cattle is one of the largest drivers of deforestation globally, and the biggest culprit in this respect is the Brazilian beef market.
Beef is big business in Brazil, and, despite international murmurings to the contrary, the government aids cattle farmers in the destruction of the rainforest. Not only is this devestating in terms of habitat loss, but it also destroys a natural weapon against climate change that would ordinarily be recycling vast quantities of carbon dioxide. The cattle industry in Brazil is already worth an estimated $7 billion and accounts for about 14% of global deforestation - that's more than the total deforestation of any other country in the world except Indonesia. Of the rainforest itself, between 70% and 80% of previously forested land is now used for grazing livestock whilst a large portion of the remainder is given over to growing food for cattle. Despite being the world leader in beef exports, the government has pledged to increase the country's output over the coming years.
Emissions: The livestock industry is a prodigious contributor to greenhouse gas emissions and is responsible for 18% globally. That is more than the entire transport sector. However, whilst everyone is aware or at least becoming aware of the obvious link between driving a car and warming the earth, the link between meat and climate change is less obvious and even more dangerous. Animal farming is responsible for 9% of anthropogenic CO2 emissions mainly derived from the ongoing destruction of vital carbon capture areas of forest. More damaging still is the fact that the industry also accounts for 37% of anthropogenic methane, a gas with up to 23 times the global warming potential of CO2. Furthermore, it is the cause of 65% of anthropogenic nitrous oxide, an even more dangerous chemical with potentially 296 times the global warming capacity of CO2. Leaving aside the incredible water pollution exacted by animal wastes, antibiotics, hormones, tannery chemicals, fertilisers and pesticides, these numbers alone should be enough to convince anyone of the dangers of expanding this industry further.
Intensive Farming: Intensive farming practises, both animal and arable, account for a wealth of pollution and habitat destruction and it has been suggested that livestock production, particularly though the destruction of the rainforest, is the single biggest contributor to loss of biodiversity worldwide. The current rate of species loss is up to 1000 times faster than it would in an ordinary evolutionary cycle. It is vital, therefore, that every effort be made to challenge intensive farming practises wherever possible and supplement these with an emphasis on free range and organic farming.
Shockingly, according to the UN, pasture land amounts to a whopping 26% of the ice-free land on the planet. If we also account for the fact that feedcrops make up 33% of total arable land, we find out that livestock production employs 70% of all agricultural land and comprises 30% of the land surface of the planet. Now, the global average of animal product intake per person currently sits at 38% of total protein. If we lowered that to just 30%, we could free up approximately 27 million km2 of land that could be used for arable farming or else left to regrow and provide valuable carbon capture. In so doing, less strain is placed on our food system resulting in less need for deforestation and less reliance on intensive farming methods.
Health: To maintain a healthy diet, a study by Costello in 2009 suggested regulating your intake of animal products to about 20% of your total protein intake. This amounts to about 90g per person per day. Predictably, advanced Western countries currently sit well above this recommendation, whilst other countries are significantly below. In the UK we each average about 218g of meat per day, whilst in the US the number is even higher at 342g. In contrast Rwandans consume about 12g of meat each per day, whilst people in Sierra Leone manage about 17g.
I think these statistics speak volumes both about the incredibly inequitable distribution of food across the globe, and the relative health problems of these populations. Obesity and malnutrition are closely linked to meat consumption and whilst 1 in 5 people in the UK is obese and 1 in 3 in the US, 1 in 3 children in Sierra Leone is malnourished and in Rwanda over 50% of children are without enough food. By reducing our intake of meat in the West, and increasing the amount of meat consumed by poor countries we can help make the planet a whole lot healthier.
Some of the statistics I've cited here are mind-bogglingly scary and have hopefully shed some light the severe impact that irresponsible farming practises are having on the environment. I'm trying to stick to the 90g rule as far as possible, but if you want to make it easier you can just cut out meat entirely at lunchtimes, or during the week if you're brave, or for at least one or two days a week. It really will make an enormous difference. If you're interested in finding out some more info, or checking my sources, I've listed some links below.
Eating the Planet - Report commissioned by Friends of the Earth and Compassion in World Farming
Livestock's Long Shadow - Influential report by the FAO
Slaughtering the Amazon - Commissioned by Greenpeace
Obesity and Meat
Meat consumption per capita
Malnutrition in Rwanda, and Sierra Leone
No comments:
Post a Comment