Nutrition Made Simple! | Does beef cause climate change? | “What I’ve learned”, red meat and environment @NutritionMadeSimple | Uploaded May 2021 | Updated October 2024, 1 hour ago.
Beef and climate change. Fact-checking 'What I've Learned"'s video on red meat and climate change, climate science evidence on meat, esp. beef, and environmental impact
What I’ve learned: beef isnt that polluting
raising animals= greenhouse emissions. growing their food = more emissions. eliminating animal agriculture reduces greenhouse emissions GHGs by 2.6%?
stop raising animals BUT keep growing tons of corn even tho cows and pigs and chickens are gone
grow tons of corn. our diet = 80% grains, mostly corn
even with these crops =better for environment, less emissions
if we keep producing animal food emissions don’t change as much
farmers would stop growing food for cows? continue to grow animal feed?
Feedlot diet: plant-based scenario= 5,000 cals
3,000cals from corn (24 ears of corn)
if farmers didn’t change, kept putting out corn? (assuming crops in proportions currently grown)
no animals but produce their food? environmental improvement = not large
worth moderating animal agriculture? animal agriculture esp. beef, corn in monoculture, generates less emissions
no animal products = lower food GHG emissions
US meat = 3x the global average, dietary change has greater effect, reducing food emissions by 61-73%”
we eat more beef, change our diet
no animal products: “28% reduction in global greenhouse gas emissions”. emissions from food in half, total emissions down by 28%
50% reduction in animal products = 20% less emissions
animal products = majority of food-related emissions (70% of agricultural emissions). “meat dominates impacts on emissions”
moderating animal foods. reducing food waste cuts food emissions by 9%, changing diet, moderating animal foods, 56% less emissions from food
total emissions? GHG emissions require diet change
less animal products, esp. beef= effective to reduce dietary emissions
no Animal Agriculture = 56% less Emissions
less emissions: cattle to pigs/chicken. more impact than plants, less than red meat
red meat? do environmental scientists hate beef? environmental impact is disproportionate
emissions for plant foods. bigger emissions: eggs, dairy, fish, chicken, pork, beef. higher than other animal products
meat (beef or lamb) = environmental impact 20–100 times plants. animal products = 2–25x higher than plants. whether foods are matched by protein content, serving, or mass
beef requires more feed. 1lb of milk or eggs = 2-3lbs of plants, poultry = 2-5, pork 3-9, beef = 24-49
less cows = less crops
feeding cows grass: environment. grass-fed beef requires more water, more fossil fuels, bigger carbon footprint (emissions extend)
ruminants convert grass into human-edible protein, big environmental impact
is all beef the same? some producers cause more emissions. even cleanest beef = worse than animal foods and much worse than plant protein like beans
dietary change (foods we eat)=more benefits than tweaking production
optimizing beef
fossil fuels? can we cut fossil fuels and leave food alone?
reducing emissions from fossil fuels is essential but even if fossil fuel emissions were halted, food would prevent climate targets
climate goals require changes to food system. eliminate fossil fuels = more leeway on food
changes to transportation + energy + Food (big chunk of emissions)
many don’t want to change fossil fuels
are animals/beef a significant source of emissions? yes. will it solve climate change by itself? no
Connect with me:
Facebook: facebook.com/DrGilCarvalho
Twitter: twitter.com/NutritionMadeS3
Animations: Even Topland @toplandmedia
References:
pnas.org/content/pnas/114/48/E10301.full.pdf
pnas.org/content/115/8/E1701
pnas.org/content/115/8/E1703
pnas.org/content/115/8/E1704
fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-details/168400/nutrients
pnas.org/content/115/8/E1706
fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-details/168400/nutrients
science.sciencemag.org/content/360/6392/987
nature.com/articles/s41586-018-0594-0
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211912418300361
thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(18)31788-4/fulltext
iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa6cd5/pdf
https://academic.oup.cxom/nutritionreviews/article/77/4/197/5307079#.XK0fvVXgKR8.email
mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/127
science.sciencemag.org/content/370/6517/705
Disclaimer: The contents of this video are for informational purposes only and are not intended as medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment, nor to replace medical care. This information is accurate and conforms to the available scientific evidence to the best of the author's knowledge at the time of posting. See your physician or qualified health provider with questions regarding medical conditions. Never disregard medical advice or delay seeking it because of information contained in Nutrition Made Simple!.
#NutritionMadeSimple #GilCarvalho
Beef and climate change. Fact-checking 'What I've Learned"'s video on red meat and climate change, climate science evidence on meat, esp. beef, and environmental impact
What I’ve learned: beef isnt that polluting
raising animals= greenhouse emissions. growing their food = more emissions. eliminating animal agriculture reduces greenhouse emissions GHGs by 2.6%?
stop raising animals BUT keep growing tons of corn even tho cows and pigs and chickens are gone
grow tons of corn. our diet = 80% grains, mostly corn
even with these crops =better for environment, less emissions
if we keep producing animal food emissions don’t change as much
farmers would stop growing food for cows? continue to grow animal feed?
Feedlot diet: plant-based scenario= 5,000 cals
3,000cals from corn (24 ears of corn)
if farmers didn’t change, kept putting out corn? (assuming crops in proportions currently grown)
no animals but produce their food? environmental improvement = not large
worth moderating animal agriculture? animal agriculture esp. beef, corn in monoculture, generates less emissions
no animal products = lower food GHG emissions
US meat = 3x the global average, dietary change has greater effect, reducing food emissions by 61-73%”
we eat more beef, change our diet
no animal products: “28% reduction in global greenhouse gas emissions”. emissions from food in half, total emissions down by 28%
50% reduction in animal products = 20% less emissions
animal products = majority of food-related emissions (70% of agricultural emissions). “meat dominates impacts on emissions”
moderating animal foods. reducing food waste cuts food emissions by 9%, changing diet, moderating animal foods, 56% less emissions from food
total emissions? GHG emissions require diet change
less animal products, esp. beef= effective to reduce dietary emissions
no Animal Agriculture = 56% less Emissions
less emissions: cattle to pigs/chicken. more impact than plants, less than red meat
red meat? do environmental scientists hate beef? environmental impact is disproportionate
emissions for plant foods. bigger emissions: eggs, dairy, fish, chicken, pork, beef. higher than other animal products
meat (beef or lamb) = environmental impact 20–100 times plants. animal products = 2–25x higher than plants. whether foods are matched by protein content, serving, or mass
beef requires more feed. 1lb of milk or eggs = 2-3lbs of plants, poultry = 2-5, pork 3-9, beef = 24-49
less cows = less crops
feeding cows grass: environment. grass-fed beef requires more water, more fossil fuels, bigger carbon footprint (emissions extend)
ruminants convert grass into human-edible protein, big environmental impact
is all beef the same? some producers cause more emissions. even cleanest beef = worse than animal foods and much worse than plant protein like beans
dietary change (foods we eat)=more benefits than tweaking production
optimizing beef
fossil fuels? can we cut fossil fuels and leave food alone?
reducing emissions from fossil fuels is essential but even if fossil fuel emissions were halted, food would prevent climate targets
climate goals require changes to food system. eliminate fossil fuels = more leeway on food
changes to transportation + energy + Food (big chunk of emissions)
many don’t want to change fossil fuels
are animals/beef a significant source of emissions? yes. will it solve climate change by itself? no
Connect with me:
Facebook: facebook.com/DrGilCarvalho
Twitter: twitter.com/NutritionMadeS3
Animations: Even Topland @toplandmedia
References:
pnas.org/content/pnas/114/48/E10301.full.pdf
pnas.org/content/115/8/E1701
pnas.org/content/115/8/E1703
pnas.org/content/115/8/E1704
fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-details/168400/nutrients
pnas.org/content/115/8/E1706
fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-details/168400/nutrients
science.sciencemag.org/content/360/6392/987
nature.com/articles/s41586-018-0594-0
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211912418300361
thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(18)31788-4/fulltext
iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa6cd5/pdf
https://academic.oup.cxom/nutritionreviews/article/77/4/197/5307079#.XK0fvVXgKR8.email
mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/127
science.sciencemag.org/content/370/6517/705
Disclaimer: The contents of this video are for informational purposes only and are not intended as medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment, nor to replace medical care. This information is accurate and conforms to the available scientific evidence to the best of the author's knowledge at the time of posting. See your physician or qualified health provider with questions regarding medical conditions. Never disregard medical advice or delay seeking it because of information contained in Nutrition Made Simple!.
#NutritionMadeSimple #GilCarvalho
