Today we are going to talk about something very important, yet, controversial. Agriculture, specifically, animal agriculture. Have you heard that animal agriculture is harmful to the environment? Such a statement is true, to an extent.
If you look at the carbon footprint of conventional beef, a net 33 kg of CO2 is produced per kg (2.2 pounds) of beef produced. This data comes from a simulation-based approach done by Rotz et al. in 2013. However, a more recent life cycle analysis done in 2019, again, by Rotz et al., found emissions from cattle production in the United States to be lower, around 21.3 ± 2.3 kg CO2e/kg of beef produced. As you can see, this is still a large net positive, and while the United States is improving, we want this number as low as possible.
Moving along the right in the above chart you will see products like Beyond Burger and Impossible Burger have a much lower carbon footprint, but they too are still contributing to GHG (Green House Gas) emissions.
Here is where farms like White Oak Pastures come in. White Oak Pastures is one of many farms that are practicing what is called Regenerative Agriculture. There are other names for Regenerative Agriculture, such as Holistic Land Management and Adaptive Multi-Paddock Grazing, and all of these methods carefully consider the health of the land and soil.
How do they do this?
They use ruminant animals, such as cows, goats, sheep, and buffalo to graze grasslands. As you know, humans cannot eat grass nor the vegetation that ruminants consume. Some believe we should turn the land we use to graze animals to grow crops for humans, and while this may sound like a good idea, these pastures are not well suited to grow crops, so grazing animals is the most efficient was to utilize these pieces of land. Not only can ruminant animals turn inedible grass into a nutrient-dense source of protein, but they also maintain and build the health of the land. Grasslands have evolved to have ruminant animals on them from the very beginning of time. Regenerative Agriculture aims to mimic nature, in that they keep animals on the move, which they would naturally do when faced with predator pressure. The model allows ruminants to eat the grass, yet, not to the point of killing the grass, while providing a natural fertilizer (manure), which increases soil biodiversity. The land is then allowed to rest, which allows for carbon to be sequestered (stored) into the soil, root systems expand, and the grass grows back to feed animals again.
Regeneratively raised animals are never left in a paddock (a large area of pasture) for an extended period to where they over-graze like they do in the conventional agricultural model.
This model of raising animals not only allows animals to be healthier, but it also makes for healthier soils, which contributes to a healthier planet. As you can see in the chart mentioned previously, White Oak Pastures, based on a Life Cycle Analysis done by Quantis, was found to be carbon negative. So, for every kilogram (2.2 pounds) of beef, they produce a net 3.5 kg of CO2 goes back into the soil.
Eating meat raised in a regenerative manner not only does not contribute to GHG emissions, but this form of agriculture is necessary for improving the health of our planet. If you are interested in learning more about Regenerative Agriculture, Diana Rodgers, a Registered Dietitian, and Robb Wolf have been working on a book and documentary for the last four years, called Sacred Cow. Their book will be available on the 14th of July (in 4 days), while the documentary is set to be released later this summer.
Contrary to what you have heard, going vegan is not the only thing one can do to have a smaller carbon footprint. Not only can you eat a high-quality source of protein, but you can also contribute to the health of our planet 🙂
I hope you found this information interesting. If you have questions or suggestions for topics you would like me to cover please do not hesitate to reach out!
That’s all for now!
SHARE:
Sources:
Rotz, C.A., Asem-Hiablie, S., Place. S, & Thoma, G. (2019). Environmental footprints of beef cattle production in the United States. Agricultural Systems, 169, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2018.11.005
Rotz, C. A., Isenberg, B. J., Stackhouse-Lawson, K. R., & Pollak, E. J. (2013). A simulation-based approach for evaluating and comparing the environmental footprints of beef production systems. Journal of animal science, 91(11), 5427–5437. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2013-6506
