sustainability of eating meat

[Toolip]

I was just having a discussion with someone in my class and she was saying that vegetarian eating is better than driving a Prius for the environment. I don't believe that this is true but I was stuck. I said that there is a big difference between a grass-fed and a grain-fed cow and the person I was talking to said that grass-fed cows are worse for the environment! I know this isn't an easy topic to tackle but can someone point me in the direction of some information about sustainable meat eating vs vegetarianism?

[macandcheese]

I don't know about that exact comparison, but yeah, eating non-sustainable meat is one of the worst things regular people are doing to the environment right now. There's been a lot written on this—here's a pretty straightforward article by Mark Bittman that covers it well:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/27/weekinreview/27bittman.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1

Your classmate's grass fed vs. grain fed claims seem pretty ridiculous, though. A sustainably raised, grass fed cow consumes far less resources than a factory farmed, grain fed cow does.

I was vegetarian for a long time, but over the past few years we've started eating small amounts (maybe two meals a week) of beef, pork, and lamb. Seasonal and local eating has become increasingly important to us, and it's hard to do that as a strict vegetarian, imo. I do suspect that eating small amounts of sustainable meat is better for the environment than the popular vegetarian diet, which tends to include at least some meat substitute products, plus fruit and veg that has been shipped from all over the place.

ETA: Duh. I kind of misread your post. That link may not be as useful to you as I thought. Michael Pollan might be a good source for the specific type of info you're looking for. I would be interested to know if there is solid research on that, as well!

[AJP]

Properly-managed grasslands are a carbon sink, IOW they sequester carbon in the soil.  Ecological grazing (mimicking natural cycles) can actually restore degraded land, as well.  The presence of ruminants is not the problem, the problem is the way they are currently managed under conventional systems.  Here are some links:

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1953692,00.html

"It works like this: grass is a perennial. Rotate cattle and other ruminants across pastures full of it, and the animals' grazing will cut the blades — which spurs new growth — while their trampling helps work manure and other decaying organic matter into the soil, turning it into rich humus. The plant's roots also help maintain soil health by retaining water and microbes. And healthy soil keeps carbon dioxide underground and out of the atmosphere."

http://www.smallfootprintfamily.com/2009/10/14/grassfed-beef-can-solve-global-warming/

"In other words, if we were to restore the soil fertility of the Great Plains that we destroyed in the last 150 years, atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide could be reduced to pre-industrial levels within 10-15 years.  Whether it’s cows, elephants, bison or antelope, grass requires regular destruction of its top leaves to promote root growth. It requires grazers to chomp down trees and shrubs so it won’t be overshaded, and it further requires significant amounts of their waste to fertilize the soil. This system, which evolved over millions of years, is what sequesters carbon naturally.

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/07/in-defense-of-the-cow-eating-meat-could-slow-climate-change.php

"Furthermore, let's not throw stones at cattle as methane culprits, when we have larger human-caused methane problems--namely from fossil fuel use and landfills. Our unrestrained use of coal, natural gas, oil, and petroleum products combined with our over-consumption of just-plain-stuff that ends up in landfills produces over three times the methane emissions as ruminants in this country"

http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/008338.html

[fresh_veggie]

  Just replying to agree to the pp's comments.  Conventional animal farming - bad.  Grass-fed can be great actually!  Good info there.

[Toolip]

Thank you for those links!

She was claiming that grass-fed beef produces more methane than grain-fed beef. Know anything about that?

I'm a little embarrassed to say that I don't know much about methane.

[chattyprincess]

I don't know for sure but I do know that a grassfed cow raised for meat is kept alive about 3x longer then the average feedlot cow. It would make sense that it would make more methane in the long run but since it was naturally eating pasture grasses then its actually carbon footprint would be lower because no one had to truck its food in or process anything using resources to bring it food...kwim?

[greenmagick]

Methane is just one piece of the puzzle...sounds like she is focusing only on that. 

One could argue that typically a vegetarian eats more produce out of season and that is a huge energy drain as well (though realistically many meat eaters do as well of course).  Many vegetarians eat a lot of soy and corn products and those tend to be single crop farms and GMO's...again not good.

[cristeen]

I recall reading something that indicated she has that backwards, but i dont remember where.

A cow eating grain is eating food it was not meant to. Bloat is a big issue in conventional feedlots. Bloat can actually kill the cow. You dont really see much bloat in grass-fed cattle, because they're eating their natural diet. Wish i could remember where i read that. Its the same as when you eat something that doesnt agree w you (like beans) - you get gassy and bloated feeling. Cows do the same.

And im another one that does not find vegetarianism (ovo-lacto) to be sustainable in most of the world. I suppose it could be in the tropics, with the year-round growing season, but without any animal involvement in the farm, i dont find veganism sustainable. The soil requires the nutrients it receives from the animals to sustain life. And if you have animals on the farm, youd better be doing something to restrict their numbers, or you'll be over-run in short order.

[mama1803]

Originally Posted by cristeen 

A cow eating grain is eating food it was not meant to. Bloat is a big issue in conventional feedlots. Bloat can actually kill the cow. You dont really see much bloat in grass-fed cattle, because they're eating their natural diet. Wish i could remember where i read that. Its the same as when you eat something that doesnt agree w you (like beans) - you get gassy and bloated feeling. Cows do the same.



 

I read this also.  I think it was in one of Michael Pollan's books...was it Omnivore's Dilemna where he purchased a calf and went to visit it at the feedlot? 

[lizzie]

Tell her you're eating rabbits, not beef.

Actually I don't know if that would be any better, but they certainly eat less, take less time to hit maturity and reproduce much more... efficiently? :) They eat a wider variety of greens that are easier to grow in your backyard as well.. but if it has to be a beef comparison, I really don't have much to add. I am learning a lot from the discussion though. :)

ETA: Much easier to use their droppings in your gardening and compost, as well...

[newlyminted]

I think that it is FAR easier to eat a sustainable diet that includes meat... I try really hard to eat locally and organically (and in that order) BUT:

I have 7 different varieties of dried bean, quinoa, rice, millet, popcorn, and a boat load of other dried good in my pantry. I have as much organic goods as I can find, fair trade coffe and chocolate. I try really hard to eat a good, healthy diet.

I don't know where ANY of that stuff comes from. Except for the coffee, cause it says so on the bag. My bulk dried beans? no idea. Bulk grains? no idea. Sugar? no idea. Where was this grown? How far has it travelled?

The food in my fridge? same thing. We have a winter's farmer's market and the only local produce available is sprouts and a few winter greens. Apples, those are bc grown, potatoes too. But I can't find bc winter squash to save my life. Everyting else? grown in california or mexico.

Ok, that being said: That chicken I ate on the weekend? it came from a farm less than 50km away.

One of the major factors in trying to maintain sustainablilty to me is travel distance. Can I reach my food easly? can it reach me? When I was a vegetarian, half of the year this was impossible. I think that in a responsible diet, occasionally incuding meat is far more sustainable than trying to import all of your food from overseas.

[velcromom]

Another thing to point out is that the feed given to feedlot cattle is grown with the help of tons of petroleum based fertilizers and pesticides, then trucked to the feedlots using even more fossil fuel... grassfed cattle require far less ( if not none in some cases), of this ecologically unsound support. That alone makes grassfed the more sustainable choice.

[nicolelynn]

Your friend might be talking about this: http://news.discovery.com/earth/grass-fed-beef-grain.html

[Spring Lily]

Originally Posted by Toolip 

I was just having a discussion with someone in my class and she was saying that vegetarian eating is better than driving a Prius for the environment. I don't believe that this is true but I was stuck. I said that there is a big difference between a grass-fed and a grain-fed cow and the person I was talking to said that grass-fed cows are worse for the environment! I know this isn't an easy topic to tackle but can someone point me in the direction of some information about sustainable meat eating vs vegetarianism?

I will reply as a vegetarian ....she's partly right. Being a vegetarian who eats local, seasonal produce and has a good balanced diet (not overly dependent on soy, for example) is far better for the environment than if that same person were to eat feed-lot meats, unsustainable fish and non-local animals. So if a person were to go from that meat diet to a vegetarian diet, yes, it would be better than buying a Prius as far as environmental impact.

However, people who eat sustainable meats, such as grass-fed beef, tend to eat LESS than people who eat the feed lot stuff, and are actually supporting a healthy environment. Animals are part of the natural life cycle. If a farmer cycles crops AND animals through the fields, they have a self-fertilizing system that is much healthier for the earth and the crops than it would be without animals.

She's way off on the grass-fed vs grain-fed animals, too. Grains aren't a cow's natural food, it's very fatty for them, difficult to digest, and causes intestinal problems (including more methane production). The grain diet is the reason most feed-lot cows are put on antibiotics, which leads to those medicines becoming less effective. It's why we're seeing so many diseases becoming antibiotic-resistant, which is a serious and frightening problem. Those antibiotics get washed into the water table, as well. Grains are cheaper for feed-lot farmers to buy, because corn is subsidized by the government. Grass is not! That makes corn (mostly GMO, which is another issue) dirt cheap and also the easiest way to quickly fatten up the cows for fast production of beef. Anyone arguing that grass-fed is worse does not understand the facts of the situation.

If your friend doesn't know about all of this, you might want to suggest some reading for her--Eric Schlosser and Michael Pollan will explain it quite clearly! As a vegetarian, I don't think everyone should give up meat, but if a lot more people did and everyone else switched to sustainable meat, we'd be in a much better place, health-wise and environmentally.

[SandraMort]

My question is how practical this is on a large scale. What would happen if everybody in the US decided to stop eating conventionally grown meat, dairy and eggs?  Are we ABLE to produce enough food to support our population?  Obviously it's not going to happen, but is it even a realistic goal?

[Toolip]

Thank you everyone, for all your responses! I'm really interested in the sources that people posted and I haven't had time to check them all out. I know that there are a lot of opinions out there and that this is a very complicated issue. If anyone has specific articles about the methane issue (I know that one was posted) I am interested in that. There are so many parts to this puzzle, however, and it is not something that can be summed up as simply "vegetarianism is better for the environment than driving a Prius. I mean, what a dumb argument! I don't even know how those are comparable.

Personally, I am trying to find information about the sustainability of eating meat. I eat local, pastured meat regularly and I feel great about it. I personally feel that it supports a very important industry. There is no way that I can believe that grain-fed cows have less impact on the planet then grass fed cows. It would take a whole lot to convince me of that. I just don't believe that animals who are living on their natural diet are making such a terrible impact on the planet. This planet has evolved to have plants and animals cohabitating and I just can't believe that grass-fed cows are such a threat. I believe that the existence of the grass-fed industry has a positive impact on the environment, much more than organic vegetable farming without animals.

I enjoy reading everyone's ideas and perspectives but what I am really looking for are some scientific sources that address these issues. Anyway, on with the discussion!

Originally Posted by Spring Lily 


I will reply as a vegetarian ....she's partly right. Being a vegetarian who eats local, seasonal produce and has a good balanced diet (not overly dependent on soy, for example) is far better for the environment than if that same person were to eat feed-lot meats, unsustainable fish and non-local animals. So if a person were to go from that meat diet to a vegetarian diet, yes, it would be better than buying a Prius as far as environmental impact.

However, people who eat sustainable meats, such as grass-fed beef, tend to eat LESS than people who eat the feed lot stuff, and are actually supporting a healthy environment. Animals are part of the natural life cycle. If a farmer cycles crops AND animals through the fields, they have a self-fertilizing system that is much healthier for the earth and the crops than it would be without animals.

She's way off on the grass-fed vs grain-fed animals, too. Grains aren't a cow's natural food, it's very fatty for them, difficult to digest, and causes intestinal problems (including more methane production). The grain diet is the reason most feed-lot cows are put on antibiotics, which leads to those medicines becoming less effective. It's why we're seeing so many diseases becoming antibiotic-resistant, which is a serious and frightening problem. Those antibiotics get washed into the water table, as well. Grains are cheaper for feed-lot farmers to buy, because corn is subsidized by the government. Grass is not! That makes corn (mostly GMO, which is another issue) dirt cheap and also the easiest way to quickly fatten up the cows for fast production of beef. Anyone arguing that grass-fed is worse does not understand the facts of the situation.

If your friend doesn't know about all of this, you might want to suggest some reading for her--Eric Schlosser and Michael Pollan will explain it quite clearly! As a vegetarian, I don't think everyone should give up meat, but if a lot more people did and everyone else switched to sustainable meat, we'd be in a much better place, health-wise and environmentally.

I appreciate your response but your opinion is very subjective! (the bolded part especially) I don't think it is clear that vegetarianism (even at its best, local, etc...) is better for the environment at all. Perhaps even worse in some aspects.

Also, the TF forum isn't really a place where you will get much support for the idea that not eating meat is healthier

Originally Posted by SandraMort 

My question is how practical this is on a large scale. What would happen if everybody in the US decided to stop eating conventionally grown meat, dairy and eggs?  Are we ABLE to produce enough food to support our population?  Obviously it's not going to happen, but is it even a realistic goal?

I have heard speculation that it is entirely possible. Not that I think it will happen either, but I have heard that we do have the physical space and resources. In fact, I don't think that grain-fed animals take up less space, it's just that they are crammed together and their food is grown in the fields where they could be grazing. The potential positive impacts on the environment could be HUGE (so I've heard). Makes my heart flutter to think it might happen!!

[janinemh]

I highly recommend "The Vegetarian Myth" by Lierre Keith. Keith was a vegan for 20 years and this is a really in-depth look at the environmental and health impacts of a vegetarian diet.

[Viola]

Originally Posted by SandraMort 

My question is how practical this is on a large scale. What would happen if everybody in the US decided to stop eating conventionally grown meat, dairy and eggs?  Are we ABLE to produce enough food to support our population?  Obviously it's not going to happen, but is it even a realistic goal?

This is a question that comes to me frequently.  It does seem that with current methods, there isn't enough organic produce, grass-fed meat and truly free-range eggs commercially available currently to feed everyone; there would need to be big changes in the way we do things in order for that to be possible.  I mean we obviously couldn't keep up with the modern restaurant systems and all the waste that produces if we did away with all factory farms.  I don't think veganism for the world as a whole is sustainable, nor is carnivorism for lack of a better term--I mean eating mostly animal products, like what my husband eats.  I think eating what is locally produced is the best bet, which may mean a lot more milk and meat, or a lot more fish, or a lot more nuts; but I still eat a lot of foods from a fair amount away.  So far today I've had coffee, mango and pistachios. :D  But do I think that we could get rid of conventionally produced meat, dairy and eggs and feed the world.  Heck yeah!  Look at how we manage our land resources.  I think if we suddenly had to rely only on what we could grow and process ourselves, within a day's drive, we'd have to use our land differently.  Would we have huge tracts with nothing but commercial office buildings, half empty, with big lawns in between?  Or big sports fields and golf courses? Would people be able to eat regularly eat tiny cups of yogurt that come in disposable containers?  Would we have enough corn to turn it into bags and bags of artificially flavored puffed snack products?  Maybe not.  Maybe we'd have to graze our animals on lands that used to be just for decoration, or eat the dandelion and purslane growing in our yards.  But I do think it's possible.  

This is just my opinion, btw, I'm not really sure what the experts say.  Someone once told me that organic produce is irresponsible, since we can't feed the world that way.  But I feel like this artificial way of producing one or two big commercial crops at the expense of the land and other foodstuffs, and genetically modifying seeds so they don't germinate or produce new seeds, or whatever the issue is absolutely wrong.

[Toolip]

I'm pretty sure it's true that there are some countries that don't do factory farming, all their meat (sheep and cows at least) are pastured.

[Anniebird]

Originally Posted by janinemh 

I highly recommend "The Vegetarian Myth" by Lierre Keith. Keith was a vegan for 20 years and this is a really in-depth look at the environmental and health impacts of a vegetarian diet.

Seconded.  As a recovering vegetarian, this book opened my eyes to how agriculture is not a sustainable model and is ruining the world's topsoil.  Grass-fed cows build topsoil.

Check out Cheeseslave's review of the book for a quick breakdown: http://www.cheeseslave.com/2011/02/14/book-review-the-vegetarian-myth/

Originally Posted by Toolip 

I was just having a discussion with someone in my class and she was saying that vegetarian eating is better than driving a Prius for the environment. I don't believe that this is true but I was stuck. I said that there is a big difference between a grass-fed and a grain-fed cow and the person I was talking to said that grass-fed cows are worse for the environment! I know this isn't an easy topic to tackle but can someone point me in the direction of some information about sustainable meat eating vs vegetarianism?

Seriously? Driving a Prius for the environment?  It is somewhat troublesome that ad-branding factors that much into this person's standard for environmentalism and sustainability.  Consumerism and status cars (or any cars, for that matter) will not save the planet, but some grass-fed cows just might. ;)