Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
If the non-food products (which account for about 40% of the animal) are accounted for, the food-CO2 falls by ~40% to about 51.
This doesn't seem to take into account methane production and its effect on the climate either, which would probably put cows and pigs much higher.
Right. Cattle produces a lot more than just beef. Leather, horns, bones, and hooves are additional products that come from the cow. Then there's all the animal feed and plant fertilizer that come from the less desirable parts of the cow. I wonder what the carbon footprint is when the entirety of the cow is taken into account. No part of the animal is wasted during rendering.
Another "fun" chart on various food sources green house gas emissions adjusted per kilogram of food product.
I love how the chart breaks cows into multiple categories making it look that much smaller even though it's still chart topping.
Edit: Oddly enough they're citing the same data in both the one I link and OP's link.
Why is Kilograms of food product the one axis? shouldn't it be kcals or something?
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/ghg-kcal-poore
They have that too. Beef is still the worst by a huge margin
Beef and tofu and not nutritionally equivalent.
Did I have some sort of a stroke or something? Am I hallucinating graphs that don't exist? Is OPs chart only showing tofu as an alternative and I just imagined the dozen or so other foods on the list that can be mixed and matched to build a nutritious meal with a significantly lower carbon footprint than beef?
Someone please send help, because all of these beef shills have me convinced that there are only two foods and we must all choose just one in the great food war
I like beef
Cool. I like rainforests, a stable climate, and my health. But I guess we each have our own priorities.
I'd trade all the beef for not having to wonder if the planet is going to take a dump right when I'm getting old and am less able to handle it.
I think GP is suggesting that, for a better picture, you also need to include stuff like the CO2 emissions from the vitamins you'll need to eat to balance the nutritional deficit. Given how bad meat is for the environment, it wouldn't surprise me that the total balance is still way worse for meat.
Somehow I feel the need to clarify I'm not shilling for beef, but extra vitamins is something that my vegetarian SO constantly has to be keep in mind.
it's basic physics: animal products consume more energy (calories) than they produce in food because they exert energy on living - moving, eating, converting food to energy, etc.
Eating a plant directly (or with comparable processing to meat) means less wasted energy (as in calories burned compared to calories produced as food) simply because you're going one step higher (lower?) in the food chain to obtain that energy.
Isn't air travel and large ships far worse for the environment? I don't mean to derail a conversation, but I suspect that air travel and ocean liners have a significantly bigger impact and I don't see as much coverage on that issue.
Fortunately, we have a series of tubes connecting every computer on the planet that can help answer questions like this!
In short Aviation (1.9%) and Shipping (1.7%) are smaller than Livestock & Manure (5.8%) even before factoring in the secondary impacts that are largely driven by the livestock industry, like land use change, soil loss, and deforestation.
If you're specifically talking about transportation emissions for food, there's a graph for that as well!
Supply chain represents ~18% of the overall food footprint, smaller than livestock and land use changes.
Talking meat specifically, the transportation emissions are a tiny piece of their overall footprint, as is shown in the OP.
Damn these charts are nicely made.
Agriculture makes up a full quarter of our total emissions. Some of that is because of shipping it, of course, but there is absolutely no question whatsoever that agriculture is a huge contributing factor to climate change
I don’t see as much coverage on that issue.
No, there's plenty of coverage. If anything, there isn't enough coverage on animal agriculture because people can't fathom a world where they don't eat meat (or even just significantly reduce their consumption).
Data about greenhouse emissions from transportation is talked about more frequently than any other source in my experience. I don't see the relevance to this data as beef and tofu can be produced locally or shipped overseas, so the emissions to produce the product would be a separate discussion versus emissions in transit.
Would it make more sense to compare based on calories and not weight? Since you need to eat more tofu than beef for the same calorie intake. If my math is right, tofu is about 760 kcal per kg while beef is 2500 kcal per kg so that makes it ~34 grams of CO2 per kcal for beef and ~3 grams of CO2 per kcal for tofu.
Definitely tofu is still better obviously, just wanted to compare with that metric. Not sure if it makes more sense or not.
The website has a graph for that and for protein as well. It's pretty neat
I didn't realize that there was a direct correlation between CO2 expenditure during food production and the final product's flavour
I don't like tofu. I like other meat substitutes but idk tofu is not the greatest comparison to meat in my opinion
I always find the comparison between tofu and meat a bit unfair, as it wasn't invented for that purpose. In many asian cultures it is simply a thing in its own right, only we in the West have popularized it as a meat substitute and I don't think that does tofu justice.
other meat substitutes
Tofu is not a meat substitute. Tofu is just tofu, unless someone specifically picks it as a substitute for meat and sticks to it, in which case I guess it's their personal substitute for meat.
I was curious and went looking because I suspected it was low emissions but not how low. Research seems to suggest Kangaroo meat is significantly lower GHG per kg than tofu!
In our calculations we use 1.30 CO2 equivalents for one kilogram production of kangaroo meat which is an average of the estimates reported in the literature
Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5308823/
The biggest difference here is not related to the animals themselves, but the scale.
Much of beef's emissions has to do with land use changes and diet which are both a necessary (but unfortunate) part of managing 1.5 billion cows to serve as a primary protein source for billions of people. In comparison, there's somewhere on the order of 30 million kangaroos on the planet (2% of the number of cows) and I'd wager the overwhelming majority of them are wild, not farmed for meat.
The difference in footprints here shows the differences in management practices and the downside of commercial ranching. If everyone on The planet switched their 0.5 servings of beef per day for 0.5 servings of kangaroos, nothing would be fundamentally different in the environmental outcomes. We'd still be clearing forests in the Amazon, just now it would be for kangaroos.
Sustainable meat consumption is only achieved through dramatic reductions in consumption. People don't have to quit meat, but it does have to become a thing reserved only for special occasions. Like it or not, the only path to sustainable food consumption requires everyone eating veggies (including the dreaded tofu) most of the time. Getting beef fed things like seaweed increases the portion of yearly meals that can include red meat sustainably, but does not somehow eliminate the fact that there majority of people's meals need to avoid red meat (sorry folks).
From a quick glance, it seems they didn't consider emissions coming from exporting kangaroo meat abroad. Though I fancy the total will still be way lower than the alternatives.
I'm all in for reducing beef consumption, not just because of the green aspect but also health... having said that, this is yet another fool's errand the masses have been set to follow:
You know who says changing beef consumption is impossible so it's meaningless to even try? Beef industry spokespeople.
I mean, what's more impossible - changing Western dietary habits or changing the entire structure of capitalism and representative democracy that allows rich people to own private jets?
But i need to eat meat.
No one here is saying you can't, are you trying to get permission? This is just pointing out it has a larger environmental impact than non-meat food sources.
No you don't.
Can I get some numbers on a bottle of Gochujang sauce?
I freakin love tofu, air frying it is so tasty. I just wish it were cheaper.
The carbon that we dig out of the ground and put in the air, that is the ony one relevant to global warming. Everything else is just a change of phases in a cycle.
anywhere that compares by calorie? just curious
Someone shared below, but here you go: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/ghg-kcal-poore
It's amazing how much food you have to eat when you're a vegetarian. I went vegetarian for about a year. After my first month I felt like I was dying. Simple things like putting on my shoes left me exhausted. I finally started using a calorie calculator and discovered I was getting about a thousand less calories per day than I actually needed.
I was a banker mason for 10 years before going back to university, carving stone almost every day for years, I went vegan 5 years in and I didn't experience a sudden drop in energy, I made sure I was getting enough protein and adequate amounts of vitamins (especially b12) either through food groups of vitamins tablets.
Also after not eating beef I haven't lost any muscle mass, I may be crazy but I think big beef has been lying for decades.
My beef also isn't genetically modified to survive glyphosate, which gets absorbed by the soy that gets turned into your tofu.
If industrial farms would sell the manure and spread it on fields rather than blanket them with petrolchemicals (fertilizers) this entire argument would be completely moot.
We need to return to traditional farming where the cattle can graze and naturally fertilize the land instead of being confined and mainly fed corn (which exacerbates the spread of ecoli).
Traditional farming can also reverse desertification of land therefore can reduce the CO2 footprint of this industry.
I'm not saying don't be vegan, just take a look beyond these studies that are cherry picked to cement your opinions on us monsters that are so apparently destroying this planet.
Also get mad at the military and they are the top contributors of CO2 emissions and they have 0 restrictions and are omitted from every study.
This is a lot to unpack, but I'll do my best in case it helps someone understand theses issues better:
My beef also isn't genetically modified to survive glyphosate, which gets absorbed by the soy that gets turned into your tofu
Glyphosate is bad, and should be banned. That said, beef is not somehow immune to glyphosate, as it is a contaminant in much of the food sources cattle eat, and the food for our food is not as strictly regulated as our food. Source Additionally:
Much of the glyphosate found in food is found in grains, which are often served as accompaniment to a primary protein (e.g., meat or plant proteins). Swapping a beef burger for a veggie burger (or, your tofu straw man), likely does little to reduce overall glyphosate exposure, which would be coming from the bun. Using plant glyphosate levels as a negative for going vegan is deceptive at best.
Glyphosate is not allowed in organic farming, so buying organic foods, including plant based protein alternatives, like organic tofu, dramatically reduces exposure to glyphosates. The system isn't perfect but has been shown to quickly and effectively reduce glyphosate levels. Source
While "there is currently no consensus among the scientific community, and there is controversy over the safety of glyphosate and its health consequences" Source, there are studies showing correlation with negative health outcomes, so someone playing it safe may want to avoid these chemicals out of an abundance of caution. THAT SAID, there is a significant body of evidence that consuming red meat is linked to increase the risk of heart disease, cancer, diabetes, and premature death. Source. Another Source. If you're avoiding "tofu" for your health, you're not doing yourself any favors.
If industrial farms would sell the manure and spread it on fields rather than blanket them with petrolchemicals (fertilizers) this entire argument would be completely moot.
No. Manure is only a small part of the issue. Much of the methane produced by cattle comes from digestion, not excrement. Additionally, much of the carbon footprint of cattle is a result of land use change, specifically deforestation and other land use change. None of this is solved by spreading shit around. (And its unclear from your comment but just in case it needs to be said, fertilizers and glyphosate are unrelated, but I think you know that, it was just unclear)
We need to return to traditional farming where the cattle can graze and naturally fertilize the land instead of being confined and mainly fed corn (which exacerbates the spread of ecoli).
The concept of regenerative farming is thrown around a lot as a justification for eating beef. First of all, its not happening, so stop using a pretend what if to justify bad behavior.
Secondly, a cow can graze the food it needs off of ~2 acres of (highly productive) land per head. Source.
To meet today's meat demand, there's ~1.5 billion cows on the planet. If you were to give each cow 2 acres, that would take 3 billion acres of land, or 1.5x the land area of the continental US. This would be a logistical nightmare in addition to all of the other challenges that come with this land grab. There's no scenario where we maintain current meat consumption levels sustainably.
At some point people are going to have to put down the steak and gasp eat some tofu.
Traditional farming can also reverse desertification of land therefore can reduce the CO2 footprint of this industry.
No beef required for this one. Though it is worth noting much of the desertification is directly a result of clearing land for cattle and their feed.
Also get mad at the military and they are the top contributors of CO2 emissions and they have 0 restrictions and are omitted from every study.
Agreed!
this is based on the poore-nemecek study and should not be regarded as "true". it's "true if they methodology reflects reality" but it does not.
So avoid beef, lamb, and mutton, got it.
I am all for meat free (or lab grown) alternatives and they're getting better but honestly in their current state if I had to eat tofu instead of beef I'd just eat neither. (Maybe I've just been unlucky and only tried really bad tofu?)
Tofu is really easy to prepare poorly, it's important to season it heavily as bland tofu doesn't really taste like anything. But this makes tofu extremely versatile, it can even be used in smoothies.
Exactly. There are so many who don't like tofu. Like my mother in-law, who just took a bite of raw tofu and came to the conclusion it's not for her. Yeah, no shit.
My wife and I then spent some time serving her various recipes, where tofu is one of the main ingredients. And now she likes it.
I like, what my wife says about tofu: it's like a blank canvas. You have to paint it with spices and various cooking methods to make it beautiful.
Another comparison are Mozzarella cheese or noodles. Bland and boring on their own, but great in combination with sauces and spices.
... Now I wan't to eat the "scrambled tofu", my wife sometimes cooks. It's fucking delicious.
The other comments are right, but if you don't like tofu there are absolutely other options. Legumes in particular are really good for the same kind of role in many dishes, and in my opinion are generally far more enjoyable. Get some mushroom and/or seaweed flavours in there for the umami and butter beans for the texture and all the nutritional goodness and I'm a happy man