© Vegetarian-Fun.com
Vegetarian Polluters?
My spouse recently brought a 2007 article* to my attention. Titled: "Vegans
vs. Vegetarians: What kind of diet is best for the environment?" by Robert
Neubecker, it spurred some thought about claims of 'best' when applied to our
eating habits and proclivities.
One of the main arguments for going vegetarian (besides not killing animals
that feel pain) is that the very processes involved with animal production for
human consumption are highly enviornmentaly pollutive.
The second argument is that such usage of plant food to create animal protein
is a waste of resources. Specifically, that it is a 12-time more efficient use
of fertilizer and fossil fuels to produce a calorie of plant material than
animal.
Vegetarian versus vegan -- who's the worst polluter? It's an issue that
involves complexities rivaling those of weather predictions. Vegans, who eat
neither meat nor any animal products, are correct in claiming that by
eliminating the middleanimal, all the bovine methane production of milk/cheese producers that contribute to greenhouse gasses and manure accumulation of any food animal with the attendant odor and pollution hazards are removed. In fact, vegans can legimately claim to be less environmentally impactive than vegetarians!
However, a claim of environmental impact has to take into account a whole
range of considerations:
-- If a community raises what it eats, what happens when the soil is of such
poor quality that growing grains is impossible? Some animals can do well on
grasses and weeds raised in poor soil conditions.
-- Trucking fertilizer across country or shipping end products around the
world all use fossil fuels, inefficiently. Remember, we are not talking about
'profits', we're just considering environmental impacts. Once profits come
into play, the discussions tend to get heated!
-- We've already referenced manure and methane, so we'll not beat those issues further.
If a protein source is scarce, human existence precludes the luxury of vegan
versus vegetarian and environmental concerns take a back seat. First, you
survive; then, you debate.
And while high protein consumption usually accompanies wealth accumulation
(protein consumption in the U.S. has increased about 10% per year since 1961; China's meat consumption doubled over the last decade!), you don't need much protein each day to live healthily.
Choose your protein source wisely.
*Referenced with author's permission. To read the full text of Robert
Neubecker's article, go to: http://www.slate.com/id/2174826/
vs. Vegetarians: What kind of diet is best for the environment?" by Robert
Neubecker, it spurred some thought about claims of 'best' when applied to our
eating habits and proclivities.
One of the main arguments for going vegetarian (besides not killing animals
that feel pain) is that the very processes involved with animal production for
human consumption are highly enviornmentaly pollutive.
The second argument is that such usage of plant food to create animal protein
is a waste of resources. Specifically, that it is a 12-time more efficient use
of fertilizer and fossil fuels to produce a calorie of plant material than
animal.
Vegetarian versus vegan -- who's the worst polluter? It's an issue that
involves complexities rivaling those of weather predictions. Vegans, who eat
neither meat nor any animal products, are correct in claiming that by
eliminating the middleanimal, all the bovine methane production of milk/cheese producers that contribute to greenhouse gasses and manure accumulation of any food animal with the attendant odor and pollution hazards are removed. In fact, vegans can legimately claim to be less environmentally impactive than vegetarians!
However, a claim of environmental impact has to take into account a whole
range of considerations:
-- If a community raises what it eats, what happens when the soil is of such
poor quality that growing grains is impossible? Some animals can do well on
grasses and weeds raised in poor soil conditions.
-- Trucking fertilizer across country or shipping end products around the
world all use fossil fuels, inefficiently. Remember, we are not talking about
'profits', we're just considering environmental impacts. Once profits come
into play, the discussions tend to get heated!
-- We've already referenced manure and methane, so we'll not beat those issues further.
If a protein source is scarce, human existence precludes the luxury of vegan
versus vegetarian and environmental concerns take a back seat. First, you
survive; then, you debate.
And while high protein consumption usually accompanies wealth accumulation
(protein consumption in the U.S. has increased about 10% per year since 1961; China's meat consumption doubled over the last decade!), you don't need much protein each day to live healthily.
Choose your protein source wisely.
*Referenced with author's permission. To read the full text of Robert
Neubecker's article, go to: http://www.slate.com/id/2174826/
Receive two FREE bonus ebooks!
1. Vegetarian recipes
2. Smoothie recipes
How? It's easy!
Privacy policy:
Your email address is safe;
we NEVER share our list.
1. Vegetarian recipes
2. Smoothie recipes
How? It's easy!
Privacy policy:
Your email address is safe;
we NEVER share our list.
