New concerns on livestock emissions

Abstract

A report argues that farm animals are more of a climate problem than previously thought, writes Nigel Williams. A report argues that farm animals are more of a climate problem than previously thought, writes Nigel Williams. An influential report by the UN's Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), published in 2006, highlighted the contribution to greenhouse gas emissions that raising livestock entails. They believe 18 per cent of annual worldwide greenhouse gas emissions are attributable to cattle, buffalo, sheep, goats, camels, horses, poultry and pigs. But a new analysis published in World Watch argues the production of livestock could contribute much higher levels of emissions. Robert Goodland, retired lead environmental adviser to the World Bank Group, and Jeff Anhang, an environmental specialist at the World Bank Group's International Finance Corporation, argue that replacing livestock products with better alternatives would be the best strategy for reducing overall greenhouse gas emissions.The authors argue that just a 25 per cent reduction in livestock production between now and 2017… could lead to a 12.5 per cent reduction in global anthropogenic emissions by itself. The authors argue that just a 25 per cent reduction in livestock production between now and 2017… could lead to a 12.5 per cent reduction in global anthropogenic emissions by itself. They highlight the effects of clearing forests to create the grazing land for the increasing global demand for meat. Growth in markets for livestock products is greatest in developing countries where forest is often cleared to create grazing land. “Rainforest normally stores at least 200 tons of carbon per hectare,” they write. Replaced by grassland, the tonnage of carbon stored per hectare is reduced to eight, they say. They argue that the FAO report does not count the annual greenhouse gas emission reductions from photosynthesis that are foregone by the loss of the forest and the 33 per cent of arable land used for growing animal feeds rather than leaving it to regenerate forest. A key risk factor for climate change is the growth in the human population, projected to be about 35 per cent between 2006 and 2050. In the same period the FAO projects that the number of livestock worldwide will double, as will their emissions, while it is widely expected that emissions from other industries will drop, they say. “This would make the amount of livestock-related emissions even more unacceptable than today's perilous levels.” The authors argue that just a 25 per cent reduction in livestock production between now and 2017, the end of the commitment period to be discussed in Copenhagen this month, could lead to a 12.5 per cent reduction in global anthropogenic emissions by itself. This is almost as much as what is expected to be negotiated for industrial emissions in Copenhagen, they say. And there is other high-profile backing for a reduction in meat consumption. Britain's Lord Stern, chair of the influential 2006 report on the costs of tackling global warming, in a recent interview with The Times, said: “Meat is a wasteful use of water and creates a lot of greenhouse gases. It puts enormous pressure on the world's resources.” “It is a fact that the production of meat can be relatively carbon intensive because of the energy used to rear and feed the animals and the methane emitted by livestock,” he wrote in the paper. “It is particularly important that people should be provided with some other indication of ‘carbon content’, just as they are given details about the nutritional value or country of origin. For example, we surely now expect to be informed about the emissions of cars that we are able to buy.” He predicted that people's attitudes would evolve until meat-eating became unacceptable, the paper said. “But it would be extremely counterproductive to try to dictate the choices that consumers can make,” he wrote. “I think it's important that people think about what they are doing and that includes what they are eating.” Lord Stern is a former chief economist at the World Bank and now professor of economics at the London School of Economics and chair of the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment. He told the paper he was deeply concerned that popular opinion had so far failed to grasp the scale of the measures needed to address climate change, or the importance of the UN meeting in Copenhagen.