When we think about winning the fight against climate change, most people concentrate on reducing greenhouse gas emissions from cars, trucks and other machines powered by fossil fuels. However, while these emissions sources are certainly worthy of our attention, another culprit receives far less than it deserves: our food.
Farm and food sustainability are important pieces of the climate change puzzle, but at the moment, climate-sustainable diets are not on the menu. In the developing world, about 821 million people suffer from hunger. Meanwhile, rich countries waste enough food every year to feed 750 million people.
Here is where the connection between food and climate change comes in: As people climb out of poverty — as many are — they demand more meat and dairy. This trend has grave implications for agriculture’s ecological footprint.
Animals consume more food than they produce. Cows release large volumes of heat-trapping methane, and clearing land for pasture releases carbon dioxide at a staggering rate.
If the beef and dairy industries were a country, it would be the world’s third-largest emitter of greenhouse gases, behind only the US and China.
Fortunately, there is a solution: eat less meat, and more fruit and vegetables. Reducing red meat consumption to twice per week would reduce global farmland by three-quarters — an area equivalent in size to the US, China, the EU and Australia combined.
Doing so would also make nutritional sense. At the moment, livestock farming uses about 80 percent of the planet’s farmland, but produces just 18 percent of our calories.
Worst of all, animal farming is a threat to our water supply; the Stockholm International Water Institute says the world could run out of fresh water by 2050 unless people reduce their consumption of animal products to just 5 percent of their daily calorie requirements.
Something must change, and fast. Celebrities certainly understand this. Climate guru and former US vice president Al Gore, who comes from a family of cattle ranchers, is now vegan, as is his old boss, former US president Bill Clinton. Tennis stars Serena and Venus Williams, pop singer Beyonce, and many others are also reducing their meat consumption.
Meanwhile, schools all over the world are adopting “Meat-free Mondays” to teach students about sustainability. Even McDonald’s has begun offering McVegan burgers in Scandinavia, apparently to rave reviews.
A recent study published by the Economist Intelligence Unit and the Barilla Center for Food and Nutrition Foundation (BCFN) found that official policies toward sustainable food and food waste are also changing.
In 2016, for example, France became the first country in the world to prohibit grocery stores from wasting food. Italy has adopted a similar law.
Apartment dwellers in Denmark, where Danish Prime Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen has put food waste on the political agenda, throw out 25 percent less food than they did five years ago.
The SU-Eatable Life project, a three-year European Commission initiative that I am leading in partnership with BCFN — aims to demonstrate that dietary changes can have a significant ecological effect.
Data show that by eating less meat and wasting less food, European consumers could reduce water consumption by 2 million cubic meters and lower carbon dioxide emissions by about 5,300 tonnes every year.
So, what can each of us do to support these efforts? For starters, we should consume more vegetables and grains, which would be good for the planet’s health and our own.
A French study last year found that vegetarians are often healthier than meat eaters, because they eat a more varied diet and consume fewer calories.
We should eat according to the BCFN’s Double Food and Environmental Pyramid, which recommends foods that are high in nutritional value and less damaging to the environment; plant-based proteins are the best.
In a world dominated by vegans, agricultural greenhouse-gas emissions would be 70 percent lower than they are today. That would be a welcome mouthful indeed.
Riccardo Valentini, a professor of forest ecology at the University of Tuscia, won the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize as a member of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Donald Trump’s return to the White House has offered Taiwan a paradoxical mix of reassurance and risk. Trump’s visceral hostility toward China could reinforce deterrence in the Taiwan Strait. Yet his disdain for alliances and penchant for transactional bargaining threaten to erode what Taiwan needs most: a reliable US commitment. Taiwan’s security depends less on US power than on US reliability, but Trump is undermining the latter. Deterrence without credibility is a hollow shield. Trump’s China policy in his second term has oscillated wildly between confrontation and conciliation. One day, he threatens Beijing with “massive” tariffs and calls China America’s “greatest geopolitical
On Sunday, 13 new urgent care centers (UCC) officially began operations across the six special municipalities. The purpose of the centers — which are open from 8am to midnight on Sundays and national holidays — is to reduce congestion in hospital emergency rooms, especially during the nine-day Lunar New Year holiday next year. It remains to be seen how effective these centers would be. For one, it is difficult for people to judge for themselves whether their condition warrants visiting a major hospital or a UCC — long-term public education and health promotions are necessary. Second, many emergency departments acknowledge
US President Donald Trump’s seemingly throwaway “Taiwan is Taiwan” statement has been appearing in headlines all over the media. Although it appears to have been made in passing, the comment nevertheless reveals something about Trump’s views and his understanding of Taiwan’s situation. In line with the Taiwan Relations Act, the US and Taiwan enjoy unofficial, but close economic, cultural and national defense ties. They lack official diplomatic relations, but maintain a partnership based on shared democratic values and strategic alignment. Excluding China, Taiwan maintains a level of diplomatic relations, official or otherwise, with many nations worldwide. It can be said that
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) made the astonishing assertion during an interview with Germany’s Deutsche Welle, published on Friday last week, that Russian President Vladimir Putin is not a dictator. She also essentially absolved Putin of blame for initiating the war in Ukraine. Commentators have since listed the reasons that Cheng’s assertion was not only absurd, but bordered on dangerous. Her claim is certainly absurd to the extent that there is no need to discuss the substance of it: It would be far more useful to assess what drove her to make the point and stick so
RSS