You Can't Be a Meat-Eating Environmentalist: Celebrate Earth Day by Going Vegan

By Heather Moore, published Apr 19, 2007
Published Content: 13  Total Views: 337  Favorited By: 2 CPs
Rating: 2.0 of 5
If you plan on celebrating this Earth Day, April 22, by taking a short shower, wearing a "Save Our Oceans" T-shirt, riding a bus or a bike instead of driving a car, collecting recyclable cans, and chowing down on fried chicken or cheeseburgers-such as I used to do-you may be doing more harm than good. If you want to green the planet, start by greening your diet. All the recycling in the world can't undo the environmental damage done by animal agriculture.

A November 2006 United Nations report revealed that raising animals for food generates more greenhouse gases than all the cars and trucks in the world combined. Senior U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) official Henning Steinfeld said that the meat industry is "one of the most significant contributors to today's most serious environmental problems."

Carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide together cause the vast majority of global warming. The livestock sector is one of the largest sources of carbon dioxide and the single largest source of both methane and nitrous oxide emissions. In fact, according to the U.N., "the livestock sector accounts for 9 percent of CO2 deriving from human-related activities, but produces a much larger share of even more harmful greenhouse gases. It generates 65 percent of human-related nitrous oxide, which has 296 times the Global Warming Potential of CO2. Most of this comes from manure."

A study conducted by researchers at the University of Chicago determined that switching to a vegan (pure vegetarian) diet is more effective in countering global warming than switching from a standard American car to a Toyota Prius. The researchers, Gidon Eshel and Pamela Martin, found that American meat-eaters, on average, are responsible for nearly 1.5 tons more carbon dioxide per person per year than vegans simply because of their food choices.

Comments
Showing Comments 1 - 2 of 2
 
 
my question is why does it take cutting down on meat to save the grains, corn etc that feeds them? Sure you can say that could be used to feed the hungry in the world but we already have the food supply avail to feed everyone. We already can do this and we don't have to become vegetarians. I never understood why doing something about the problems in the world require a sacrifice of some kind. We have the tech and the ability to get everyone setup with cheap abundant fuel, a good water supply, and food without anyone having to give up anything except their time to make it happen. Nobody ever asks each other to invest the time to get this stuff done, we either have to give up something that is ok to have or eat, or our money. Time is much more meaningful, but we are just to busy in our daily lives so it's stuff like losing choices in life and higher taxes. Pay to not have to deal with the real issues. :)

Posted on 04/20/2007 at 4:04:00 AM

 
5,000 gallons of water to produce 1 pound of meat? Do you have a source for that? I'd like to learn more.

Posted on 04/20/2007 at 1:04:00 AM

Type in Your Comments Below - (1000 characters left)
Your name:

Submit your own content on this or any topic. Get started »
Showing Comments 1 - 2 of 2
 
Most Commented On