Eating less red meat better for the environment

April 27, 11:54 AMFood ExaminerEric Burkett

Previous Next

Comment Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Food Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

How many miles-per-gallon does your burger get?
(Photo: Stock.xchng) 

Cutting back on your meat consumption is better for the environment. That’s according to a recent study by the World Watch Institute. Actually, cutting back on your meat consumption is better for your health and easier on your budget, too, but let’s stick with the environmental aspect of this for the time being.

Before the 1900s, meat consumption in the United States was significantly lower than it is today. It was the advent of refrigeration in the 1890s that made long range transportation and storage of meat far more practical. Better storage and transportation also made meat far cheaper than it had been until then. According to one study “the adoption of refrigeration in the late-nineteenth-century United States increased dairy consumption by 1.7% and overall protein intake by 1.25% annually after the 1890s.”

With the production of meat for widespread distribution came a serious shift, however, in the country’s agricultural resources. Grains that had been grown and utilized for direct consumption by people – who therefore derived the immediate benefits of its production – were now being consumed by larger numbers of cattle, and with far less efficiency.

“It takes 4-5 kilograms of feed to produce 1 kilogram of meat”, according to the United Nations Population Fund.

As meat consumption rises in places such as India and China, we see even more grain that could be used to feed people used to feed animals destined for slaughter, instead. Between the growth and transportation of these grains, and the growth and transportation of the livestock both before and after slaughter, huge amounts of fuel are used simply to get that nice chuck roast to the table.

“…replacing red meat and dairy with chicken, fish, or eggs for one day per week would save the equivalent of driving 760 miles per year,” wrote Sarah DeWeerdt in this month’s World Watch magazine. “Replacing red meat and dairy with vegetables one day a week would be like driving 1,160 miles less”.

I am not a vegetarian, nor have I any desire to become a vegetarian but like most Americans, I eat far more meat than necessary. Why? Anymore, it’s simply easy. From grabbing a quick meal on the run to trying to think of something to throw together for dinner at the last moment, meat is easy. It’s everywhere. It’s hard to avoid.

Cutting back on our meat consumption is a good choice for many reasons: for our health, for our budgets, and for our environment.