—

sources:

https://climatechange.ucdavis.edu/news/can-seaweed-cut-methane-emissions-on-dairy-farms/

https://caes.ucdavis.edu/news/articles/2018/may/can-seaweed-cut-methane-emissions-on-dairies

http://www.fao.org/in-action/enteric-methane/background/en/

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2019/08/forests-of-seaweed-can-help-climate-change-without-fire/

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/culture/food/the-plate/2016/11/seaweed-may-be-the-solution-for-burping-cows/

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-bad-of-a-greenhouse-gas-is-methane/

sound familiar? welcome to america, where the average citizen consumes a staggering 217.5 pounds of meat each year, a figure that far exceeds the global average of 41.3 pounds per capita. meat is part of our culture; many of us grew up with meat at the center of our dinner plates, under the impression that it was good for us. yet, in recent years, mounting evidence has suggested high levels of meat consumption may not be the healthiest option for our bodies and our planet. so why are we still married to meat, despite the warning signs?

nutrition scientists have been investigating meat for years. in 2015 the international agency for research on cancer (iarc) classified processed meat as a carcinogen, and red meat as a probable carcinogen. the who and american cancer society next urged the public to limit meat consumption. diets rich in animal protein are also linked to increased cardiovascular risks and all-cause mortality, while those high in plant-protein show protective effects.

from a sustainability standpoint, livestock has a higher water and carbon footprint than any other food, emitting significant amounts of methane and other greenhouse gases from their farts and burps. researchers estimate that it takes about 100 times the amount of water to produce animal protein compared to vegetable protein. this all goes without mentioning, of course, the animal welfare concerns many have surrounding commercially raised meat.

with climate change an urgent threat, and historically high rates of chronic, preventable disease, we must put down our forks and assess if we are engaging in best-practice dietary-initiatives for our bodies, the planet, and humanity at large.

seeing as the food system contributes roughly a third of the greenhouse gas emissions, and that 5 of the 10 leading causes of death in the u.s. are diet-related, there’s a real opportunity to better our health and protect the planet.

yet we often eschew this opportunity, allowing convenience and fleeting preference to trump ethical considerations surrounding the food choices we make. we blissfully fail to acknowledge the impacts of meat, drowning out uncomfortable thoughts with the sizzling sound of bacon frying on the stove. the time is now, however, to push for decreased consumption of meat.

a colossal task, meat reduction strategies historically have have been met with deep resistance. when a school in texas attempted to implement a meatless monday policy, offering just one meatless meal per week, backlash erupted, and the measure was seen as overly coercive. and when reduced meat consumption was proposed for the 2015 dietary guidelines, heavy meat-industry lobbying ensured the suggestion did not make the cut.

what opposers who denounce such initiatives as overly paternalistic fail to realize, however, is that their taste for a meat-heavy diet is a result of a preference that has been architected for them. the government uses tax dollars to feed our meaty appetites, spending billions on agricultural subsidies, a bulk of which support commercially raised meat, often incentivized by “big meat’s” hefty political contributions to persuade lawmakers.

and the meat industry’s power extends beyond its pocketbooks. marketing campaigns have established cultural norms that contribute to our meat-heavy mindset, telling us our bodies need “high quality” animal protein or we will become malnourished or anemic, and that eating only plants is unsatisfying and emasculating, all contributing to resistance to shift away from animal protein. after all, believing these notions is far easier than changing something so personal and emotionally charged as our diets.

but if we continue to consume meat at the present rate, we set ourselves on a trajectory for resource depletion, irreversible damage to the planet, and a multitude of preventable health risks. moreover, we jeopardize the right for future generations to food access and a healthful planet.

with momentum growing in the plant-based food movement, there has never been a better time to nudge for reduced meat consumption. incentivization of meatless monday practices, continued advocacy for reductionist messaging in dietary guidelines, and education about meat’s impacts, may prove monumental.

even if national policy is presently out of reach, we can begin by adjusting our own diets and work on changing the social norms around meat. and we don’t have to push the world into veganism overnight to make a difference. by eating a little less, applauding when meat-free options are offered out of the home, and celebrating plant-based meals, we can decrease meat demand and foster a cultural shift where plants become preferential. doing so can shrink our ecological footprint, improve our health, and ensure sustainable food choices for future generations. if there is a true desire to make a positive impact for health of humanity or the planet, it’s time to put the money where our mouths are, and back off the beef.

but it turns out organic, grass-fed animals actually contribute more to greenhouse gases and water usage than factory farmed ones. to meet demand, scaling up factory-farmed beef isn’t the answer, either, according to a june 2015 mother jones article. and with those disconcerting facts, consuming large amounts of meat, in general, is getting harder to reconcile.

animal agriculture comprises 18% of greenhouse gas emissions. to give a comparison, transportation exhausts make up only 13% of greenhouse gas emissions worldwide. that means that meat production contributes more to the destruction of our planet than all of the cars, buses and trains combined.

it also takes about 2,500 gallons of water to produce just one pound of beef.

(photo by scott bauer/usda ars)

the average american consumes more than 70 pounds of meat each year, which is 10 to 12 times more than the meat intake of the average person in other countries, such as mozambique or bangladesh.  

vegetarians and vegans have made the decision to completely cut animals and their byproducts from their lives. while these diets are both accepted and understood in our culture, a lot of people don’t have the time, money, or inclination to completely eliminate meat.

is there an alternative? introducing: reducetarianism.   

what does it mean to become a reducetarian? simply reduce your meat intake. the concept is as simple as it sounds. for a variety of reasons, including environmental impact, health benefits and animal advocacy, reducetarians find the middle ground between passionate carnivore and vegetarian.

choose one day each week designated to limiting your meat consumption. many restaurants have certain meatless meals or specials; and many whole foods market locations participate in meatless mondays, where customers can fill a tray with any mix of fruit, vegetables and other vegetarian food items for $8.

 
(photo by ralph h. daily/wikimedia commons)

following this trend, consider eliminating meat from your diet on specific days of the week, or perhaps pledging to only eat meat on the weekends or when you go out for meals with friends. if meat is a large part of your diet that would be difficult to reduce to once or twice a week, another option is to consume animal meat once a day if you would usually have it with two meals, or limiting to half portions.

another way to reduce meat consumption is to substitute animal meat for other proteins such as tofu, seitan, legumes and whole grains. there are also a variety of fake meats to replace animal meat in common recipes.

(photo by andrea nguyen/creative commons)

besides the health benefits of becoming a reducetarian, which include reducing heart disease and stroke, curbing obesity, helping fight against diabetes, and limiting cancer risk, the environmental impact involves saving resources worldwide.

are you able to cut back?

(image at top by kevin walsh/creative commons)

cows are king of converting plant material into energy so it’s no wonder that researchers have begun to look to bovine for answers. everyday the average cow digests 150 pounds of plant material- and while you may think it’s because they have four stomachs, its actually much more scientific than that. researchers have discovered an enzyme in the digestive system of cows which allows for the excessive plant intake.

this enzyme presents a great new solution to break down biomass in order to create bio fuel. the goal of the researchers is to find the enzyme that can “efficiently break down the toughest fibers in switch grass.”

switch grass is tough, but it can be used to make ethanol and other biofuels. also because it is so rugged it can grow in places that other crops can’t. however this pesky plant may be the solution, given the right enzyme.

gross as using cow gut technology is, it very well could be the answer to producing biofuels efficiently and with little consequence.

for more information visit these sites:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/01/27/us-biofuel-cow-idustre70q7h620110127?pagenumber=1
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/01/110127141705.htm”>

more ideas about biofuels can be found here: biofuels