Environmental impact of beef production

djpbarry · 22-07-2014 11:43am #1

A new study suggests that the production of beef is around 10 times more damaging to the environment than any other form of livestock.

Scientists measured the environment inputs required to produce the main US sources of protein.

Beef cattle need 28 times more land and 11 times more irrigation water than pork, poultry, eggs or dairy.

The research has been published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

While it has long been known that beef has a greater environmental impact than other meats, the authors of this paper say theirs is is the first to quantify the scale in a comparative way.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-28409704

I've always thought that beef production is very intensive, but I am surprised that the environmental impact is so much greater than, say, pork production. I've long wanted to see farmers diversify and farm animals requiring fewer "inputs", like deer and goats, but I guess this isn't going to happen without incentives and, in a European context, a reworking of the CAP.

Galvium Irredentum · 26-07-2014 9:24pm

They farm deer in NZ - a few here too - they're declining; there was somebody in earnest on thefarmingforum.co.uk who posted wanting to know would the farmers there keep elephants or other endangered species if there were subsidies?!

Markcheese · 28-07-2014 8:54am

Does a lot not depend on how intensively the cattle are fed , cattle in a feed lot fed on grain being compared to pigs /chickens in battery units fed on grain (cows have less efficient digestion so you'd feed more pigs/chickens from a hectare)
But cattle in a pasture based system with a lot less inputs especially in an area not ideally suited to grain production it's a different story ..,
So who commissioned and or paid for the research ??

fits · 28-07-2014 9:08am

Is it a life cycle assessment type study using the consumed calorie as a functional unit? I dont have access to the paper. I dont really see much new about these conclusions tbh.

These types of studies are not new. US type beef production systems have a much bigger environmental footprint than the typical grass fed beef systems you get here (although they are also still in turn much larger than poultry and pigs etc).

fits · 28-07-2014 9:11am

Markcheese wrote: »

Does a lot not depend on how intensively the cattle are fed , cattle in a feed lot fed on grain being compared to pigs /chickens in battery units fed on grain (cows have less efficient digestion so you'd feed more pigs/chickens from a hectare)
But cattle in a pasture based system with a lot less inputs especially in an area not ideally suited to grain production it's a different story ..,

This one focusses on GHG but compares beef from various systems
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16397099

Jim Martin · 28-07-2014 11:05am

I love a nice juicy steak as much as the next man (person), but it has to be admitted that this is a grossly inefficient way fo feed the human population when land space & over use of the earth's resources are becoming such a big issue!

The_Captain · 28-07-2014 2:44pm

Cattle would be a lot more damaging to the atmosphere than pigs or chickens due to the amount of methane they exhale.

They also have an extremely low yield per acre, meaning a lot more space is required to keep cows than cereal crops. I've heard it takes about 7 acres of space to produce the same amount of food from cattle as you would get from 1 acre of wheat.

But beef would have one of the highest profit margins in any decent sized farm

djpbarry · 28-07-2014 3:07pm

Markcheese wrote: »

Does a lot not depend on how intensively the cattle are fed…

Sure, but I guess the study is based on how beef is actually produced for consumption in the US, rather than how it might be produced.

Markcheese wrote: »

So who commissioned and or paid for the research ??

I don’t think it’s been “commissioned” by anyone, but the lab behind the work (http://www.weizmann.ac.il/plants/Milo) has received funding from a whole bunch of different sources, listed at the end of the paper as follows:

“R.M. is the incumbent of the Anna and Maurice Boukstein Career Development Chair, and is supported by the European Research Council (260392 – SYMPAC), European Molecular Biology Organization Young Investigator Program, Helmsley Charitable Foundation, The Larson Charitable Foundation, Estate of David Arthur Barton, Anthony Stalbow Charitable Trust and Stella Gelerman, Canada.”

djpbarry · 28-07-2014 3:07pm

fits wrote: »

Is it a life cycle assessment type study using the consumed calorie as a functional unit? I dont have access to the paper.

You should do – it’s open access:
dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1402183111

fits wrote: »

I dont really see much new about these conclusions tbh.

From the authors:

“Livestock-based food production is an important and pervasive way humans impact the environment. It causes about one-fifth of global greenhouse gas emissions, and is the key land user and source of water pollution by nutrient overabundance. It also competes with biodiversity, and promotes species extinctions. Empowering consumers to make choices that mitigate some of these impacts through devising and disseminating numerically sound information is thus a key socioenvironmental priority. Unfortunately, currently available knowledge is incomplete and hampered by reliance on divergent methodologies that afford no general comparison of relative impacts of animal-based products. To overcome these hurdles, we introduce a methodology that facilitates such a comparison. We show that minimizing beef consumption mitigates the environmental costs of diet most effectively."

fits · 29-07-2014 9:26am

Just speed read it there. Nicely written paper. They used LCA data for the GHG calculations and then the other environmental impacts werent life cycle calculations but based on partitioning resources used for feed production. So its not perfect. Its definitely not news to me that beef is highly resource inefficient.

I have been trying to eat much less meat and am almost vegetarian when I am abroad for environmental reasons. Not so successful when I am in Ireland though.

djpbarry · 29-07-2014 1:52pm

fits wrote: »

Its definitely not news to me that beef is highly resource inefficient.

Me neither, but quantitative analyses lend weight to the argument that there are far more efficient means of feeding people.

Not only that, but I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of people were of the opinion that eating beef was perfectly environmentally sound because cows live on grass. Or something.

Timmaay · 06-08-2014 11:15am

The_Captain wrote: »

Cattle would be a lot more damaging to the atmosphere than pigs or chickens due to the amount of methane they exhale.

They also have an extremely low yield per acre, meaning a lot more space is required to keep cows than cereal crops. I've heard it takes about 7 acres of space to produce the same amount of food from cattle as you would get from 1 acre of wheat.

But beef would have one of the highest profit margins in any decent sized farm

Not in Ireland anyways! Beef farmers are on their knees, in part due to oversupply, but also the factories/meat processors/supermarkets have considerable control to influence the market when they want to at the expense of farmers. The national suckler herd has reduced massively over the last few years, with a shift towards dairying. In terms of beef in Ireland moving forward, male calves from dairy cows (largely just a byproduct) will form the bases of beef supply here. The other thing you have to consider here in Ireland is much of the land used for beef production out west is not fit for tillage.

That 7acres to produce the same meat as 1 acre of corn, is it with a grass based system or a feedlot like in the states? It would be interesting to know how better (if any!) grass based beef is over corn based.

robp · 06-08-2014 3:03pm

Timmaay wrote: »

Not in Ireland anyways! Beef farmers are on their knees, in part due to oversupply, but also the factories/meat processors/supermarkets have considerable control to influence the market when they want to at the expense of farmers. The national suckler herd has reduced massively over the last few years, with a shift towards dairying. In terms of beef in Ireland moving forward, male calves from dairy cows (largely just a byproduct) will form the bases of beef supply here. The other thing you have to consider here in Ireland is much of the land used for beef production out west is not fit for tillage.

That 7acres to produce the same meat as 1 acre of corn, is it with a grass based system or a feedlot like in the states? It would be interesting to know how better (if any!) grass based beef is over corn based.

Just out of interest. What is the most profitable type of farming these days in Ireland? Tillage or dairying?

Timmaay · 07-08-2014 1:56pm

robp wrote: »

Just out of interest. What is the most profitable type of farming these days in Ireland? Tillage or dairying?

Dairying by a country mile. Biggest hurdle to dairying for the last 30 years was the eu quota, that is gone next year. Tillage farmers won't be all converting over however due to the large capital required for cows, sheds and slurry storage, alongside being tied down to the farm milking twice a day!

Markcheese · 07-08-2014 4:41pm

I suppose you'd have check over on the farming forum to see how much feed you'd need (in an Irish system) to produce and fatten a pig , then see how much land that'd need, (wheat maybe 4 ton to the acre ? Who knows for the soya ect)
And do the same for the beef, (big difference between calf from a suckler herd and calf from a dairy herd where the calf is essentially a byproduct) . How much grass/silage and meal to finish a beef animal ? And how much land to finish it ?....
I suppose to be fair you should include energy(diesel,electricity) and fertilizer and spray inputs ? (you'd use a
lot more fuel growing an acre of grain than an acre of grass) ,
And assuming it's all on top grade land, a lot of land out there producing beef that couldn't produce grain (at current prices !)
If I could be arsed I'd sit down for a week and tabulate all the figures (probably on teagasc web site) ....
Ain't gonna happen though...

The_Captain · 07-08-2014 7:26pm

Timmaay wrote: »

Not in Ireland anyways! Beef farmers are on their knees, in part due to oversupply, but also the factories/meat processors/supermarkets have considerable control to influence the market when they want to at the expense of farmers. The national suckler herd has reduced massively over the last few years, with a shift towards dairying. In terms of beef in Ireland moving forward, male calves from dairy cows (largely just a byproduct) will form the bases of beef supply here. The other thing you have to consider here in Ireland is much of the land used for beef production out west is not fit for tillage.

That 7acres to produce the same meat as 1 acre of corn, is it with a grass based system or a feedlot like in the states? It would be interesting to know how better (if any!) grass based beef is over corn based.

Figures are based on grass feeding. Feedlots would reduce the direct space needed for beef farming, but would increase the indirect land needed through growing feed

wexie · 07-08-2014 7:32pm

djpbarry wrote: »

I've long wanted to see farmers diversify and farm animals requiring fewer "inputs", like deer and goats, but I guess this isn't going to happen without incentives and, in a European context, a reworking of the CAP.

What would you get from farming goats (curious)? I can't see goat steak being a big seller?

I know Angora goats are kept for their wool and you can keep goats for milk, but besides that? They don't really get eaten do they?

The_Captain · 07-08-2014 10:29pm

Goat is fúcking delicious

robp · 08-08-2014 8:40am

wexie wrote: »

What would you get from farming goats (curious)? I can't see goat steak being a big seller?

I know Angora goats are kept for their wool and you can keep goats for milk, but besides that? They don't really get eaten do they?

Young goat is like lamb. Very popular in some parts of the world.

djpbarry · 08-08-2014 10:06am

wexie wrote: »

What would you get from farming goats (curious)? I can't see goat steak being a big seller?

I know Angora goats are kept for their wool and you can keep goats for milk, but besides that? They don't really get eaten do they?

Very popular in South Asia. It's quite similar to mutton, but as said above, young goat is similar to lamb. It's very lean meat - works well in stews, curries, that kind of thing. Relatively easy to get hold of here in London.

fits · 08-08-2014 10:34am

Goat meat can also be mixed in with beef to give lower fat burgers.

wexie · 08-08-2014 12:12pm

I never knew that, how come it's never caught on here then? From what I understand from this thread you'd be able to keep more goats on the same amount of land, they're probably cheaper to look after as well? So aside from the environmental impact it seems to make better business sense? Although I guess if you can't sell them it doesn't really matter how many you can rear.

djpbarry · 08-08-2014 1:14pm

wexie wrote: »

I never knew that, how come it's never caught on here then?

People are just used to eating certain meats I guess. But, if you want to give goat a try, here's some recipes to get you started:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/food/recipes/goats_saddle_with_45211
http://www.bbc.co.uk/food/recipes/goatandsweetcorncurr_93827
http://www.bbc.co.uk/food/recipes/goat-herd_pie_89365

envaction · 12-11-2015 4:56am

You know, this does surprise me too. I knew that meat product isn't always the best because of all the things that they did to it, but I didn't know that it's bad for the environment. I think that is why so many people aren't eating as much meat anymore. I can't say that I blame them either, after hearing this.

Macha · 12-11-2015 9:58am

[mod] Old thread. Closed. [/mod]

Environmental impact of beef production

Comments