Last week, The Commission on Sustainable Agriculture and Climate Change released its recommendations to help the world achieve food security in the face of climate change.
The current issue of New Scientist publishes an article describing a recently released study, ‘Achieving Food Security in the Face of Climate Change’, which was commissioned by the CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research). For more on that study, see the CCAFS news release of 16 November 2011: ‘Global Commission Charts Pathway for Achieving Food Security in Face of Climate Change‘.
Sujata Gupta’s New Scientist article on meat consumption, ‘Just how much meat can eco-citizens eat?’ (online publication date: 16 November 2011; print issue date: 19 November 2011; print issue number: 2839), contains what we believe is a factual error. Gupta quotes a 2007 article in the Lancet (‘Food, livestock production, energy, climate change, and health’, doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61256-2) that 80% of agricultural greenhouse gas emissions come from meat production.
More credible figures, compiled from international global assessments by agricultural systems analyst Mario Herrero and his colleagues at the International Livestock Research Institute, are the following:
The total agricultural sector emits around 25–32% of global anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. Crops emit 14% (EPA 2006) and all livestock emit 11–18%, depending on how emissions are attributed (FAO 2006, EPA 2006, PBL 2010). The emissions from livestock can be divided roughly as 30% methane from enteric fermentation, 30% nitrous oxide from manure management and 40% from carbon dioxide from land-use changes for grazing and feed production (FAO 2006). Figures for the emissions from land-use changes carry a lot of uncertainty. Emissions can also be divided by species and product. For example, the dairy sector is responsible for roughly 27% of greenhouse gas emissions from livestock (FAO 2010) while monogastric production (pigs/poultry) is responsible for 10–20% of the livestock emissions. Hence, it is not possible that beef production can account for 80% of all agricultural emissions. Even if beef cattle represent 50–60% of livestock emissions, this translates roughly into a figure close to 30–35% of all agricultural emissions—certainly not 80%. What is true is that of all livestock products, beef is the most inefficient in terms of greenhouse gas emissions produced per unit of product, especially compared to dairy and monogastrics (De Vries and de Boer 2010).
Herrero and his colleagues at ILRI, CCAFS and elsewhere are publishing updates on topics concerning livestock production and climate and other kinds of global change. Look out, for example, for the following book chapter, due next month, which we will report on in this blog: M Herrero, PK Thornton, P Havlík, and M Rufino, Livestock and greenhouse gas emissions: Mitigation options and trade-offs. In: E Wollenberg, A Nihart, ML Tapio-Bistrom and C Seeberg-Elverfeldt (eds), Climate Change Mitigation and Agriculture, Earthscan, London, UK (in press).
See an earlier report on a similar topic in this ILRI News Blog: Livestock and climate change: Towards credible figures, 27 Jun 2011.
With contributions from Mario Herrero (ILRI), Molly Jahn (University of Wisconsin-Madison) and Susan MacMillan (ILRI)
CCAFS Coordinating Unit - University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Science, Department of Plant and Environmental Sciences, Rolighedsvej 21, DK-1958 Frederiksberg C, Denmark, phone +45 35331046; Email ccafs [at] cgiar [dot] org, EAN 5790000279012
Lead Center - International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT)
Re: Credible figures for livestock emissions of greenhouse gases
Defiantly transportation. Take a look around you next time you are driving arnoud a big city on the freeway. Think of the gas that you are using in your car, then multiply it times the number of vehicles that you can count. Look at the huge parking lots at the malls, businesses, banks, etc how many vehicles? All the trucks and trains that deliver goods and services that we use everyday. Look at the airport, the number of planes constantly taking off and landing. Look at the number of houses and businesses, big and small. They all need lighting, heating, air conditioning, power to run all their automated equipment.Then just realize you are looking at a very tiny part of the world. Where does all this fuel come from and go to after it is burnt? Livestock eat grass, corn, and drink water. All of these are renewable resources that are good for the environment. They are a living animal like you and me. Livestock breath air then exhale carbon dioxide which is totally different than carbon monoxide and co2 that vehicles and factories emit. Their feces are full of nitrogen which actually is a great fertilizer for the fields. However it is best to keep it out of the rivers and lakes as it promotes more weed growth.
Re: Credible figures for livestock emissions of greenhouse gases
One thing that is missing from this debate is the fact that not all people can survive on a vegan diet. People cannot always choose the diet that is best for their body, but we do know that many people cannot get protein from plant material or VB12 in sufficient quantities to survive otherwise the 12 million children a year would not be dying from lack of protein. This foolishness has got to stop as human beings have been eating meat for thousands of years and their bodies can eat plants but that doesn't mean all bodies can eat plants. In fact each year more and more children are becoming allergic to plant materials that are high in protein such as legumes and we know that soy the basic substitute for meat is damaging to many humans reproduction processes and causes other diseases. The nation did not get fat until vegetable oils were introduced and replaced animal fat in cooking. High carbs, sugar and vegetable fats should be banned as they are the real cause of obesity. New studies show that vegans are more prone to heart damage due to low levels of nutrients in their bodies. Also to maintain a healthy body a vegan has to keep checking their blood levels, not everyone can afford to do that. Being an organic vegan is the fad of the wealthy and rich who have access to labs, processed vitamin supplements and special foods that grown in distant lands such as almonds, seaweed, spriulina and other foods needed to supply nutrients but not grown in their own country. This diet is very expensive to maintain properly.
Post new comment