UN body to look at meat and climate link

[Mr. Sparkle]

Source: BBC News

UN specialists are to look again at the contribution of meat production to climate change, after claims that an earlier report exaggerated the link.

A 2006 report concluded meat production was responsible for 18% of greenhouse gas emissions - more than transport.

The report has been cited by people campaigning for a more vegetable-based diet, including Sir Paul McCartney.

But a new analysis, presented at a major US science meeting, says the transport comparison was flawed.

The 2006 report - Livestock's Long Shadow, published by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) - reached the figure by totting up all greenhouse-gas emissions associated with meat production from farm to table, including fertiliser production, land clearance, methane emissions from the animals' digestion, and vehicle use on farms.

But Dr Mitloehner pointed out that the authors had not calculated transport emissions in the same way, instead just using the IPCC's figure, which only included fossil fuel burning.

"This lopsided 'analysis' is a classical apples-and-oranges analogy that truly confused the issue," he said.

One of the authors of Livestock's Long Shadow, FAO livestock policy officer Pierre Gerber, told BBC News he accepted Dr Mitloehner's criticism.

"I must say honestly that he has a point - we factored in everything for meat emissions, and we didn't do the same thing with transport, we just used the figure from the IPCC," he said.

"But on the rest of the report, I don't think it was really challenged."

FAO is now working on a much more comprehensive analysis of emissions from food production, he said.

It should be complete by the end of the year, and should allow comparisons between diets, including meat and those that are exclusively vegetarian.

Read more: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8583308.stm

[flvegan]

1. Hold on...

Okay, now I'm ready.

[Big Blue Marble]

2. Awesome! N/T

[CrispyQ]

4. I love it!

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[Lautremont]

7. That thing's great!

[Beaverhausen]

8. excellent

[Kali]

12. BINGO! I win!

delicious, healthy protein from sunlight and grass

[elocs]

3. By choice or not, one day the world's meat eating habit will have to change:

http://www.vegsoc.org/environment/land_use.html

Thirty percent of the earth’s entire land surface – a massive 70% of all agricultural land - is used for rearing farmed animals.

Much of this is grazing land that would otherwise host a natural habitat such as the valuable rainforest, but crops are also grown specifically as animal feed. In fact, a third of the world’s land suitable for growing crops is used to produce feed for farmed animals7.

Livestock farming is essentially inefficient as mammals in particular are inefficient converters of feed to meat. A vast percentage of gross energy (89-97%) and protein (80-96%) contained in the cereal/grain fed to animals is not converted into edible fat or protein6 Cattle require approximately 7kg of grain in order to generate a 1kg of beef and pigs require 4kg grain for 1kg of pork.

Of course, probably long after we are dead, we will have those who enjoy their meat while the rest of the world starves. It wasn't that long ago when it was potatoes and meat rather than meat and potatoes. We are reaping what we have sowed as far as animal consumption goes.

[msongs]

5. free condoms and birth control for everyone on the planet :-) nt

[bertman]

10. damn right, elocs. Soylent Green ought to help on lots of fronts.

[Kali]

13. stats requested

"Much of this is grazing land that would otherwise host a natural habitat such as the valuable rainforest"

Much? How much?

Yes clearing rainforest for grazing is destructive but there are vast land areas that are completely suitable for BOTH raising livestock and maintaining natural habitat.

[handmade34]

6. good news!

[bvar22]

9. Go GREEN.

Eat GREEN!

LESS Meat Products
LESS Processed Food like Substances
More GOOD Food

[Kali]

11. this is a little long

but some interesting thoughts and perspectives on the topic:

http://www.srmjournals.org/doi/full/10.2111/1551-501X-31.6.20



Range Livestock Production, Food, and the Future: A Perspective

Jerry L. Holechek

Ranching and farming systems could soon drastically change because of rising world population, depletion of water supplies, agricultural land loss to urbanization, fossil fuel depletion, and concerns about food health

<snip>
Under present conditions, every 1 farmer in the United States feeds about 170 people, compared to 20 in 1900.2 Yields of most crops have tripled, and in some cases, like corn, they have increased by fivefold. This remarkable achievement has allowed the US human population to triple while food costs as a percentage of family income have dropped from 30% to 10%. An abundance of cheap food indirectly helped the United States become the world's foremost industrial power in the 1920s, build the interstate highway system in the 1950s, develop the internet in the 1990s, and become a nation of affluent suburban homeowners.3 However, there are now many concerns about future food production in the United States. They relate to its sustainability relative to energy use, its ethics in treatment of livestock, its impact on the environment, and its effects on food nutritional value and healthiness.3,4 I will discuss the development of US food production from 1900 to the present and then relate my analysis to implications for range livestock producers.

LOTS more at link
http://www.srmjournals.org/doi/full/10.2111/1551-501X-31.6.20