As the world races toward a population of 9 billion, all of whom will need to be fed, serious concerns have emerged about our ability to care for the nutritional needs of people while addressing the looming climate crisis. One facet of the conversation is the role (if any) beef should play in the future food system.
Some people have come out in favor of plant-based "meat," while others maintain beef was, is, and shall remain part of an environmentally friendly solution. This article will lay out both sides – first, the major claims of pro-plant-based advocates looking to disrupt an entrenched and subsidized industry. Then, the ranchers will have their say. In the end, people must decide for themselves which side is the more compelling.
Demand Is Rising, And Many Feel That Beef Cannot Be Sustainable
Many studies have tied beef production to climate change and other environmental hazards. With global food demand set to rise 60 to 70% by 2050, people are sounding the alarm and encouraging Americans to forego beef in favor of alternatives. Here are the major environmental arguments in favor of plant-based meat.
Cattle Require Too Much Land
Animal farming accounts for 80% of all agricultural land use in the world. However, it only makes up 17% of humanity's food supply. It turns out that the cows are eating tremendous amounts of food that could be part of a human diet. Per calorie, this is catastrophically inefficient land use.
On the other hand, using our crops to feed people instead of cattle would double the number of people we could feed. So, by itself, this approach would increase the food supply more than recovering all food waste in the system.
The Beef Sector's Emissions Are Much Higher Than The Alternatives
Animal agriculture has higher GHG emissions than the entire transportation sector worldwide. The three primary sources of these emissions are deforestation, growing animal feed, and animal gas and manure. Fortunately, the ingredients for plant-based meats have much lower emissions, and processing them into the final product only accounts for less than a quarter of the total emissions. Furthermore, plant-based meat's more efficient land use can allow for more human-edible crops and reforestation.
Animal Agriculture Is A Drain On The Water Supply
Animal agriculture uses way too much of our clean water supply – almost a third of the total employed in global agriculture. Over 98% of it goes to watering the feed crops that the animals devour, wasting freshwater irrigation that could grow crops for human consumption. Alternative meat products only require the water used to produce their ingredients – the plants go straight into the human diet.
Industrial Beef Farms Damage The Health Care System
In the US, 70% of medical antibiotics go to animals in the agricultural system. Often, perfectly healthy animals receive small doses as preventive measures. As a result, many bacteria become resistant to the treatments over time. Since these antibiotics are the same ones used in human medicine, humans become more susceptible to illness and death. However, plant-based meat uses no antibiotics, keeping human treatments effective for longer.
Others Cry Foul, Point To Benefits Cattle Can Bring To The Environment
The case for plant-based meat is strong, and many studies support its producers' health and environmental claims. But can a simple swap be an effective way to address our food supply's sustainability issues?
Emissions Claims May Be Overblown
Ranchers are the first people affected by bad weather and a changing climate. Therefore, they are uniquely positioned to assess the effects of cattle farming on the environment and have a vested interest in preserving their resources. They believe that they (and cows!) are part of the climate solution.
According to the EPA, US beef production only accounts for 2% of US GHG emissions. Even if one includes feed, fuel, and electricity, the amount only climbs to 3.7%. On the other hand, electricity and transportation emit 25% and 27% of US GHGs, respectively.
Claims about meat emissions often reference all animals or contain outdated, global numbers. In addition, they include countries like India with huge cattle populations but almost zero harvesting for religious reasons. US beef cattle account for .5% of global GHG emissions. Even if we completely eliminated beef from the American diet, there would be no appreciable positive impact on the global climate.
Cattle Are An Integral Part Of Many Ecosystems
US cattle production is the most efficient in the world. We don't clear forests for more cropland, don't plow land that people should not farm, and have high animal welfare standards. In addition, cattle ranches preserve natural habitats for animals that would be evicted by urbanization and suburban creep.
Well-Managed Grazing Can Increase Carbon Sequestration
The land and water use arguments against beef farming are often misleading. For example, they usually count all the water used to grow animal feed crops as "wasted," whereas the water that irrigates plant-based meat's ingredients is not - after all, those plants feed people. Since both sets of water remain part of the natural water cycle, the claim is illusory.
Furthermore, the concerns over land use and caloric efficiency are overblown. Our food system can produce more than enough calories to feed our growing population without expanding the acreage we use. In addition, pushing for more calories per unit of land can have dire consequences for human health and the environment.
Finally, well-managed cattle can undo all the damage caused by monocultured crops (used in making plant-based meats). In fact, multi-paddock feeding patterns that provide healthy diets can turn beef farms into carbon sinks. Moreover, plant-based meat is still a net carbon producer by the admission of its own sustainability reports.
Going Plant-Based and Better Cattle Management Each Have Something to Offer
It is impossible to cover all aspects of the real vs. faux meat debate in one short discussion. However, the central claims of the plant-based meat crowd state that the beef industry uses too much land and water, has excessive emission rates, and poses other threats to human health.
The beef industry, for its part, believes that their detractors' numbers don't add up and that well-managed cattle are a perfectly viable part of a comprehensive sustainable food system. In fact, they claim, cows can even help the land sequester even more carbon and regenerate the soil. Regardless of which side you prefer, the ongoing debate will continue spurring innovation in both industries – with potentially huge benefits to the planet.
Key Takeaways
Go Organic – Whether you go plant-based or real meat, do your best to consume food that is "USDA Certified Organic." The certification's plants and animals are more sustainable than most alternatives.
Waste Not – Another hidden downside to plant-based and authentic beef is waste. Reducing consumption may be an excellent choice for personal health, and making several shorter trips to the grocery store each week (if it's close by) will prevent you from overbuying.
Stay Local – Lengthy supply chains are enormous contributors to global warming. Vegans, vegetarians, and carnivores can help by sourcing their food locally. While you might not find the newest plant-based meats at a farmer's market, plenty of healthy vegetables await.
As the world races toward a population of 9 billion, all of whom will need to be fed, serious concerns have emerged about our ability to care for the nutritional needs of people while addressing the looming climate crisis. One facet of the conversation is the role (if any) beef should play in the future food system.
Some people have come out in favor of plant-based "meat," while others maintain beef was, is, and shall remain part of an environmentally friendly solution. This article will lay out both sides – first, the major claims of pro-plant-based advocates looking to disrupt an entrenched and subsidized industry. Then, the ranchers will have their say. In the end, people must decide for themselves which side is the more compelling.
As the world races toward a population of 9 billion, all of whom will need to be fed, serious concerns have emerged about our ability to care for the nutritional needs of people while addressing the looming climate crisis. One facet of the conversation is the role (if any) beef should play in the future food system.
Some people have come out in favor of plant-based "meat," while others maintain beef was, is, and shall remain part of an environmentally friendly solution. This article will lay out both sides – first, the major claims of pro-plant-based advocates looking to disrupt an entrenched and subsidized industry. Then, the ranchers will have their say. In the end, people must decide for themselves which side is the more compelling.
Demand Is Rising, and Many Feel that Beef Cannot Be Sustainable
Many studies have tied beef production to climate change and other environmental hazards. With global food demand set to rise 60 to 70% by 2050, people are sounding the alarm and encouraging Americans to forego beef in favor of alternatives. Here are the major environmental arguments in favor of plant-based meat.
Cattle Require Too Much Land
Animal farming accounts for 80% of all agricultural land use in the world. However, it only makes up 17% of humanity's food supply. It turns out that the cows are eating tremendous amounts of food that could be part of a human diet. Per calorie, this is catastrophically inefficient land use.
On the other hand, using our crops to feed people instead of cattle would double the number of people we could feed. So, by itself, this approach would increase the food supply more than recovering all food waste in the system.
The Beef Sector's Emissions Are Much Higher than the Alternatives
Animal agriculture has higher GHG emissions than the entire transportation sector worldwide. The three primary sources of these emissions are deforestation, growing animal feed, and animal gas and manure. Fortunately, the ingredients for plant-based meats have much lower emissions, and processing them into the final product only accounts for less than a quarter of the total emissions. Furthermore, plant-based meat's more efficient land use can allow for more human-edible crops and reforestation.
Animal Agriculture Is a Drain on the Water Supply
Animal agriculture uses way too much of our clean water supply – almost a third of the total employed in global agriculture. Over 98% of it goes to watering the feed crops that the animals devour, wasting freshwater irrigation that could grow crops for human consumption. Alternative meat products only require the water used to produce their ingredients – the plants go straight into the human diet.
Industrial Beef Farms Damage the Health Care System
In the US, 70% of medical antibiotics go to animals in the agricultural system. Often, perfectly healthy animals receive small doses as preventive measures. As a result, many bacteria become resistant to the treatments over time. Since these antibiotics are the same ones used in human medicine, humans become more susceptible to illness and death. However, plant-based meat uses no antibiotics, keeping human treatments effective for longer.
Others Cry Foul, Point to Benefits Cattle Can Bring to the Environment
The case for plant-based meat is strong, and many studies support its producers' health and environmental claims. But can a simple swap be an effective way to address our food supply's sustainability issues?
Emissions Claims May Be Overblown
Ranchers are the first people affected by bad weather and a changing climate. Therefore, they are uniquely positioned to assess the effects of cattle farming on the environment and have a vested interest in preserving their resources. They believe that they (and cows!) are part of the climate solution.
According to the EPA, US beef production only accounts for 2% of US GHG emissions. Even if one includes feed, fuel, and electricity, the amount only climbs to 3.7%. On the other hand, electricity and transportation emit 25% and 27% of US GHGs, respectively.
Claims about meat emissions often reference all animals or contain outdated, global numbers. In addition, they include countries like India with huge cattle populations but almost zero harvesting for religious reasons. US beef cattle account for .5% of global GHG emissions. Even if we completely eliminated beef from the American diet, there would be no appreciable positive impact on the global climate.
Cattle Are an Integral Part of Many Ecosystems
US cattle production is the most efficient in the world. We don't clear forests for more cropland, don't plow land that people should not farm, and have high animal welfare standards. In addition, cattle ranches preserve natural habitats for animals that would be evicted by urbanization and suburban creep.
Well-Managed Grazing Can Increase Carbon Sequestration
The land and water use arguments against beef farming are often misleading. For example, they usually count all the water used to grow animal feed crops as "wasted," whereas the water that irrigates plant-based meat's ingredients is not - after all, those plants feed people. Since both sets of water remain part of the natural water cycle, the claim is illusory.
Furthermore, the concerns over land use and caloric efficiency are overblown. Our food system can produce more than enough calories to feed our growing population without expanding the acreage we use. In addition, pushing for more calories per unit of land can have dire consequences for human health and the environment.
Finally, well-managed cattle can undo all the damage caused by monocultured crops (used in making plant-based meats). In fact, multi-paddock feeding patterns that provide healthy diets can turn beef farms into carbon sinks. Moreover, plant-based meat is still a net carbon producer by the admission of its own sustainability reports.
Going Plant-Based and Better Cattle Management Each Have Something to Offer
It is impossible to cover all aspects of the real vs. faux meat debate in one short discussion. However, the central claims of the plant-based meat crowd state that the beef industry uses too much land and water, has excessive emission rates, and poses other threats to human health.
The beef industry, for its part, believes that their detractors' numbers don't add up and that well-managed cattle are a perfectly viable part of a comprehensive sustainable food system. In fact, they claim, cows can even help the land sequester even more carbon and regenerate the soil. Regardless of which side you prefer, the ongoing debate will continue spurring innovation in both industries – with potentially huge benefits to the planet.
Key Takeaways
Go Organic – Whether you go plant-based or real meat, do your best to consume food that is "USDA Certified Organic." The certification's plants and animals are more sustainable than most alternatives.
Waste Not – Another hidden downside to plant-based and authentic beef is waste. Reducing consumption may be an excellent choice for personal health, and making several shorter trips to the grocery store each week (if it's close by) will prevent you from overbuying.
Stay Local – Lengthy supply chains are enormous contributors to global warming. Vegans, vegetarians, and carnivores can help by sourcing their food locally. While you might not find the newest plant-based meats at a farmer's market, plenty of healthy vegetables await.
.jpg)
