Eating beef ’ is less green than driving’
Producing 2.2lb of beef generates as much greenhouse gas as driving a car non-stop for three hours, it was claimed yesterday. Japanese scientists used a range of data to calculate the environmental impact of a single purchase of beef. Taking into account all the processes involved, they said, four average sized steaks generated greenhouse gases with a warming potential equivalent to 80.25lb of carbon dioxide. This also consumed 169 megajoules of energy. That means that 2.2lb of beef is responsible for greenhouse gas emissions which have the same effect as the carbon dioxide released by an ordinary car travelling at 50 miles per hour for 155 miles, a journey lasting three hours. The amount of energy consumed would light a 100-watt bulb for 20 days. Most of the greenhouse gas emissions are in the form of methane released from the animals’ digestive systems, New Scientist magazine reported.
I’ve never made any secret of the fact that I don’t eat beef. Then again, it’s not something I’ve been particularly militant about. I made the decision 15 years ago not to continue eating beef. To be honest, at the time I was so broke I couldn’t afford to buy beef. Very soon, though, I noticed something surprising. I lost weight, and I felt better. After awhile, even when my financial situation improved, it made sense to continue as I had been. Except for my time in Kosovo, where beef is often presented to guests and viewed as a means of demonstrating one’s economic status, I’ve abstained.
I’m not one of those “meat is murder” fanatics from PETA. I eat fish and poulty, and even occasionally lamb. Clearly, I’m not a strict vegetarian. My decision was one that was made for personal reasons, and I’ve stuck with it over the years because I quite frankly don’t miss beef. Oh, every now and then, I’ll think about having a hamburger or a steak, and there’s nothing wrong with that. If I were to succumb to the temptation, I wouldn’t be betraying “the cause”. I have no problem with people around me eating beef, because for me it’s always been a matter of personal choice.
That being said, I’ve always agreed with the arguments put forward by Jeremy Rifkin in his book Beyond Beef: The Rise and Fall of the Cattle Culture. Simply put, Rifkin posits the argument that much of world hunger could be solved if grain grown in Third World countries for export to Western countries to be fed to cattle was used to feed humans. I happen to think that Rifkin’s arguments are well put and worth examination, but that’s an argument for another time. Unfortunately, this country is so tied into it’s love of beef that nothing that could change that will ever be seriously entertained. Nonetheless, it certainly wouldn’t hurt us to consider the consequences of our decisions now and again.
