Stopping eating meat won't save the environment

[Dio]

Eating less Meat won't save the Planet. Here's Why

Big thanks to Dr. Frank Mitloehner for chatting with me. You can find him on twitter under @GHGGuruNavigation:00:00 - Why are people saying Cows are bad for ...

youtu.be

It's been my belief for a while now that eating meat is very bad for the environment due to emissions. It also seemed inefficient and wasteful that so much land was being used to grow crops for animals instead of growing plants for feeding humans. I saw meat as a tasty but largely unneccesary middleman for most people who aren't bodybuilders like me who would benefit from the higher bioavailability of protein from meat. However after seeing this video it points out why these environmental impacts are not massive and that statistics are being used to mislead people into thinking they are making a difference to the environment by going veggie when in fact they are not at all and should instead be trying to switch to renewable energy sources and reduce their consumption of fossil fuels.

I found it particularly interesting that one of the most common food for livestock (soy) is actually already used to feed humans with the beans but there is it the inedible rest of the plant which would otherwise be wasted that is fed to cattle which is then turned into a food we can consume (beef). This means that waste is reduced not increased.
I also found it interesting that the land used for ruminant livestock which many vegan advocates say could be used for growing plant foods is not suitable for growing the type of crop humans can eat anyway so it is actually being put to its best use.

It is also pointed out that plant food for humans such as fruit is what goes to waste the most and isn't even eaten anyway it's over 1/3 that is wasted which is terrible really considering there are still many hungry people out there in the world.

Whilst I won't be making an environmental argument for not eating meat I'd still like to switch over to lab grown meats in order to decrease the number of animals being grown and killed for our food and I think the ethical arguments for vegetarianism are still valid.

 

[Ninja]

I would definitely be interested in trying and investing in lab grown proteins. I just hope that the price isn’t too much due to the complex process of making it.

 

[Dio]

I would definitely be interested in trying and investing in lab grown proteins. I just hope that the price isn’t too much due to the complex process of making it.

I think initially the costs will be high due to development of the technology and only wealthier people will eat it but over time i would expect it to become more affordable. This happened with plastic stuff when it first came out, things made of plastic such were highly desirable and pricey but now some plastic items are seen as cheap and tacky even.

 

[VikzeLink]

I feel it's not so much about the way we do it, but rather the scale of it. It's just way too much, and a lot of it goes to waste in the end. The companies needs to stop thinking of that industry as a money making thing, and instead think of it as a food providing thing. Produce less, with higher quality instead

 

[Farore's Chosen]

There are lots of ways to help protect the environment. Clean trash, recycle, donating to causes, planting stuff, turning off/unplugging electronics, raising awareness, walking places when you can, working in specific careers. Every little bit helps.

 

[NintendoCN]

I care for the environment, I really do. I got every nature oriented merit badge when I was a scout. I know farming, and my uncle would tell you that the land grows what it can, not what you want.

 

[TofuSheik]

I think you're leaving out a lot of factors, like methane production from cattle, how cutting down forests for the purpose of grazing reduces the land's ability to absorb greenhouse gases, etc. But this isn't really something I'm super knowledgable about, as I'm vegan primarily for animal rights reasons.

 

[Mikey the Moblin]

methane production from cattle

that's racist to cattle
besides, turning them into meat lowers their methane production

 

[Dio]

I think you're leaving out a lot of factors, like methane production from cattle, how cutting down forests for the purpose of grazing reduces the land's ability to absorb greenhouse gases, etc. But this isn't really something I'm super knowledgable about, as I'm vegan primarily for animal rights reasons.

The methane production stuff is all covered in the video. All livestock methane emissions account for only 2.7% of the total greenhouse gas production in the US and this is broken down into CO2 in the atmosphere and absorbed by plants in a natural cycle. It's not actually adding new carbon in the way that burning fossil fuels are.

 

[TofuSheik]

Hmmm, that's not what I've heard. I'd recommend We Are The Weather by Jonathan Safran Foer to anyone interested in the subject.

 

[Fraxinus]

From a sustainability perspective, the populations of animals that provide us with meats are regulated because they are periodically slaughtered. If this process was stopped, these livestock populations would be far greater than what could be sustained, and this would be far worse for the ecosystem and economy. Livestock populations are so large because they've been kept for a long time for this purpose, it's not something we could just stop doing and expect there to be no drastic environmental effects. It's like removing a piece of the food chain and expecting things to not go haywire.

 

[TofuSheik]

That's silly. We bring billions and billions of animals into existence every year. It's not a natural or inevitable process. If we stopped eating meat, we'd stop breeding them.

 

[DynoStretch]

This topic is making me hungry for a steakburger.

 

[Ragnarokio]

From a sustainability perspective, the populations of animals that provide us with meats are regulated because they are periodically slaughtered. If this process was stopped, these livestock populations would be far greater than what could be sustained, and this would be far worse for the ecosystem and economy. Livestock populations are so large because they've been kept for a long time for this purpose, it's not something we could just stop doing and expect there to be no drastic environmental effects. It's like removing a piece of the food chain and expecting things to not go haywire.

if you were to set every livestock animal free overnight you'd probably find that within 10 years most of them would be dead. There's just not enough food in the wild to sustain that many animals, and the animals which encroach too far onto human lands will be killed either in accidents with cars and such or by humans who they're inconveniencing. The only reason their population is so high is because we're keeping them alive. If we stopped doing that their population would decrease, not increase.

With that said, if you were going to reduce the amount of livestock we keep we'd almost certainly kill the extras and not set them free, which would have minimal envrionmental impact, and would reduce methane emissions by some amount.

 

[Mikey the Moblin]

The only reason their population is so high is because we're keeping them alive. If we stopped doing that their population would decrease, not increase.

Isnt this what fraxinus said or did I misread something