07 September 2008

Meat by numbers

The Observer has an article on some numbers associated with meat; whole article here: Meat by numbers. Two of the salient numbers are: "7lb The amount of grain it takes to produce just one pound of beef.
36.4kg The amount of carbon dioxide emitted during the production of just 1kg of beef, according to a recent Japanese study. It also releases fertilising compounds equivalent to: 340 grams of sulphur dioxide and 59 grammes of phosphate. It consumes 169 megajoules of energy. In other words, one kilo of beef is responsible for the same amount of carbon dioxide emitted by the average European car every 250 kilometres, or the energy required to light a 100 watt bulb fo 20 days."
I was also shocked to discover that consumption of meat in the UK has grow by 50% in the last 40 years. We need to stop eating so much meat people. I've said it before and I say it again; just because you like it doesn't mean it's right to eat so much. Either reduce drastically your consumption or become vegetarian. I've opted for the latter (believe me it keeps things simpler).

Another article in the Observer treats with the issue, their article quotes the UN's Dr Rajendra Pachauri who gives a less drastic piece of advice: "People should have one meat-free day a week if they want to make a personal and effective sacrifice that would help tackle climate change, "
Also note this:
Compassion in World Farming, ... has calculated that if the average UK household halved meat consumption that would cut emissions more than if car use was cut in half. ... [and the Climate Research Network report said that] eating some meat was good for the planet because some habitats benefited from grazing. ... vegetarian diets that included lots of milk, butter and cheese would probably not noticeably reduce emissions because dairy cows are a major source of methane, a potent greenhouse gas released through flatulence.

No comments:

Christian England? Maybe not...

I've just read an interesting blog article from Paul Kingsnorth . I've responded to it elsewhere with regard to its consideration of...