Worldwatch: Livestock Account for 51% Greenhouse Gases; Meat and Dairy Must Be Replaced

An article just published by the Worldwatch Institute's World Watch magazine comes to some must-read -- and must-heed -- conclusions (my thanks to Laura P. for alerting me). Environmental researchers Robert Goodland and Jeff Anhang have determined that even the high percentage of greenhouse gases for which we already understand animal agriculture to be responsible is a gross underestimate (emphasis in the following is mine):

Our analysis shows that livestock and their byproducts actually account for at least 32,564 million tons of CO2e [CO2 equivalent] per year, or 51 percent of annual GHG emissions.

This is a strong claim that requires strong evidence, so we will thoroughly review the direct and indirect sources of GHG emissions from livestock. Some of these are obvious but underestimated, some are simply overlooked, and some are emissions sources that are already counted but have been assigned to the wrong sectors.

I don't have time to analyze the report in detail tonight and indeed have had only enough time to skim it so far, but as I said at the start, it is clearly a must-read.

The conclusions are startling and compelling, and the authors do not back away from very clearly arguing that "livestock products" must be largely replaced to reverse climate change and that "this approach would have far more rapid effects on GHG emissions and their atmospheric concentrations--and thus on the rate the climate is warming--than actions to replace fossil fuels with renewable energy."

The solution they propose will make some cringe. Their recommendation is a large-scale transition to meat and dairy analogs -- in other words, a transition to processed foods made mostly from soy and seitan/wheat gluten (though vegans everywhere are pleased to point out that the latest -- and greatest -- vegan cheese is entirely soy-free). And "for consumers who do not like meat and dairy analogs, protein-rich legumes and grains are readily available alternatives."

Most folks who advocate healthy eating and indeed most vegans I know recommend limiting consumption of processed foods, but I certainly get the reason for pushing the analog angle at this point. When most people are resistant to letting go of flesh, dairy, and egg consumption, non-animal foods that mimic what's familiar can be an enormous help in making the transition. It's common for people going vegan or vegetarian to initially rely fairly heavily on processed meat and dairy substitutes but then transition away from those to more whole foods-based eating. And it is oh-so-clear that we need to move away from animal agriculture now, so I don't have a problem with helping society ease into plant-based eating with analogs, knowing that sometime after people have successfully made the switch, they're typically more amenable to relying less on analogs and more on healthier, whole-foods sources of nutrients.

I am thrilled that the researchers so plainly point out that just stopping our havoc-creating practices of (violent) animal exploitation is a far simpler, smarter, and more immediate solution than trying to accomplish the impossible by engineering our way through it. (At this moment, I'm reminded again of the post from ALDF that I've linked to previously on this blog: "The Low-Tech Fix That Dare Not Speak Its Name.")

Do go check out the article (follow this link for the summary, and then continue from there for the full article in PDF). After looking at and discussing the numbers in the first part, the authors devote the remainder of the article to exploring their recommendations in detail -- including discussion of how the replacement of animal products would also "reverse the ongoing world food and water crises," a look at the business opportunities for food companies, and analysis of the marketing, financing, and overall "benefit package" that could accompany this switch. (The authors see far more potential in getting these changes implemented from the supply/business side of things than via governments.)

Fascinating stuff. What we're increasingly learning is darkly poetic. It is our insistence on mass violence, on exploiting and killing tens of billions of our fellow animals each year, that is not only killing us in terms of our health but also threatening our planet. And slowly but surely, scientists and the public are starting to realize it.

Related: "Save the Animals, Save the Planet: Blog Action Day '09, Climate Change"

---

Photo by Flickr user foxypar4