Hamburgers are the Hummers of Food in Global Warming

[Guest guest]

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/02/16-1

 

Home > Headlines

Published on Monday, February 16, 2009 by Agence France Presse

Hamburgers are the Hummers of Food in Global Warming: Scientists

CHICAGO - When it comes to global warming, hamburgers are the Hummers of food,

scientists say.

 

A giant hamburger is assembled at a Virginia restaurant. (AFP photo)Simply

switching from steak to salad could cut as much carbon as leaving the car at

home a couple days a week.

 

That's because beef is such an incredibly inefficient food to produce and cows

release so much harmful methane into the atmosphere, said Nathan Pelletier of

Dalhousie University in Canada.

 

Pelletier is one of a growing number of scientists studying the environmental

costs of food from field to plate.

 

By looking at everything from how much grain a cow eats before it is ready for

slaughter to the emissions released by manure, they are getting a clearer idea

of the true costs of food.

 

The livestock sector is estimated to account for 18 percent of global greenhouse

gas emissions and beef is the biggest culprit.

 

Even though beef only accounts for 30 percent of meat consumption in the

developed world it's responsible for 78 percent of the emissions, Pelletier said

Sunday at a meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

 

That's because a single kilogram of beef produces 16 kilograms carbon dioxide

equivalent emissions: four times higher than pork and more than ten times as

much as a kilogram of poultry, Pelletier said.

 

If people were to simply switch from beef to chicken, emissions would be cut by

70 percent, Pelletier said.

 

Another part of the problem is people are eating far more meat than they need

to.

 

" Meat once was a luxury in our diet, " Pelletier said. " We used to eat it once a

week. Now we eat it every day. "

 

If meat consumption in the developed world was cut from the current level of

about 90 kilograms a year to the recommended level of 53 kilograms a year,

livestock related emissions would fall by 44 percent.

 

" Given the projected doubling of (global) meat production by 2050, we're going

to have to cut our emissions by half just to maintain current levels, " Pelletier

said.

 

" Technical improvements are not going to get us there. "

 

That's why changing the kinds of food people eat is so important, said Chris

Weber, a professor of civil and environmental engineering at Carnegie Mellon

University in Pennsylvania.

 

Food is the third largest contributor to the average US household's carbon

footprint after driving and utilities, and in Europe - where people drive less

and have smaller homes - it has an even greater impact.

 

" Food is of particular importance to a consumer's impact because it's a daily

choice that is, at least in theory, easy to change, " Weber said.

 

" You make your choice every day about what to eat, but once you have a house and

a car you're locked into that for a while. "

 

The average US household contributes about five tons of carbon dioxide a year by

driving and about 3.5 tons of equivalent emissions with what they eat, he said.

 

" Switching to no red meat and no dairy products is the equivalent of (cutting

out) 8,100 miles driven in a car ... that gets 25 miles to the gallon, " Weber

said in an interview following the symposium.

 

Buying local meat and produce will not have nearly the same effect, he

cautioned.

 

That's because only five percent of the emissions related to food come from

transporting food to market.

 

" You can have a much bigger impact by shifting just one day a week from meat and

dairy to anything else than going local every day of the year, " Weber said.

 

For more information on how to eat a low carbon diet, visit

www.eatlowcarbon.org.

 

 

 

 

 

So, men are scattered and smeared over the desert grass,

And the generals have accomplished nothing.

 

-Nefarious War

Li Po (Circa 750)