Did you know that your version of Internet Explorer is out of date?
To get the best possible experience using our website we recommend downloading one of the browsers below.

Internet Explorer 10, Firefox, Chrome, or Safari.

beef productionbeef production

Beef Causes Most Environmental Harm, Study Says

Like us on Facebook:
The current article you are reading does not reflect the views of the current editors and contributors of the new Ecorazzi

Put down that burger if you care about the environment!

That is the concluding message from a new study that shows beef has the largest environmental impact out of any other animal product consumed by humans.

According to the study published on the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, to produce one calorie of beef, 11 times more water and six times more nitrogen fertilizer are used than the other animal products. Not that pork, poultry, dairy and eggs are innocent in the process. They have relatively similar levels but beef still uses more resources and produces more greenhouse gasses than all others. Fish was not included in the study for the lack of comprehensive information available and because it only constitutes about 0.5 percent of the average american diet.

The authors, Gidon Eshel of Bard College, Alon Shepon and Ron Milo of the Weizmann Institute of Science in Israel, and Tamar Makov of Yale University, found that 40 percent of all the land in the United States is used for the production of animal products. The space is taken by pasture and feed crops for the animals that are eventually turned into food themselves.

“Because our results reflect current US farm policies and agrotechnology, the picture can change markedly in response to changes in agricultural technology and practice, national policies, and personal choice,” they write while suggesting a few improvements.

Firstly, they offer the idea of using the areas dedicated to feed crops to make crops that could be consumed by humans, lowering the carbon footprint of their diets. The also suggest that if people can’t completely eliminate animal products from their diet, they can at least choose the ones that least harm the Earth in their production.

This elimination approach has been recently endorsed by Sir Richard Branson, who announced last week he will no longer be eating beef in order to save the environment.

Via Tree Hugger


Like us on Facebook:
  • Siraganda

    It is very importantt that this truth is finally public and nobody can deny this fact!

  • On the flip side of this issue, it is not just the damage to the environment and wasting of resources that affects us humans when we consume the beef end product. Right now, far more than ever before, those who eat beef are consuming adrenaline. The adrenaline that is produced by ineffective stunning on high-speed slaughter lines with the frequently malfunctioning and highly inconsistent captive-bolt device is now at astronomical proportions. Since the beef industry completely suppresses any research that could be done regarding what happens in the kill box, consumers do not have any baseline levels that would be expected in correctly stunned animals to compare to the over 40% of today’s beef cattle that are actually being vivisected while conscious and hanging upside down by one foot.

    Colorectal Cancer anyone? It’s what’s for dinner!

Concerned about endangered animals? Stop eating them

Methods of animal conservation that support the exploitation of animals don’t exist for the animals, they exist for human profit.

Why we SHOULDN’T genetically ‘disenhance’ animals

Creating bandaid “solutions” to ethical problems we’ve created doesn’t address the issue at hand

What you can do if live exports disturb you

The outcry should go further than importation and should be directed at the fact that the animals in question were on their way to slaughter in the first place.