Can Vegetarianism Save the World? Nitty-gritty (hint: livestock produce 18% to 51% of Global GHGs)
... yes, cattle eat grass, so they are returning CO2 to the atmosphere that went into growing the plants they eat. BUT, cattle return the CO2 in the form of methane (e.g. phart bombs) which has 34 times the Heat Trapping capacity of CO2, over a 100 year period.
http://alumni.stanford.edu/get/page/magazine/article/?article_id=29892
[font size="3"]
Livestock, does it really matter in the scheme of all greenhouse gas emissions?
In short, yes! Depending how the figure is calculated, livestock account for anywhere between 18 and 51 percent of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions measured in CO2 equivalent. Even the conservative estimate of 18 percent is a higher share than all transport—cars, trucks, planes, airplanes and mopeds—put together. This number is reported in CO2 equivalent because many of the gases released by agriculture, such as methane, have 23 times the global warming potential (GWP) of CO2. Nitrous oxide, of which livestock is responsible for 65 percent of anthropogenic output, has 296 times the GWP of CO2. Raising farm animals is a huge part of our climate change problem, and cutting back on animal products is one of the biggest, most immediate things we all can do to help.
Changes in land use due to livestock are also a significant contributor to our global carbon footprint. We impact more land with livestock grazing than with any other use, including crops, roads and cities. According to a report by the Food and Agriculture Organization, livestock are the single largest anthropogenic user of land. The total area occupied by grazing is equivalent to 26 percent of the ice-free terrestrial surface of the planet—a full quarter of our livable Earth! Beyond the fact that much of this land was once forest before being converted to pasture, over 20 percent of the pastureland in the world are degraded to some extent by overgrazing, compaction and erosion. All of these processes release carbon to the atmosphere, and reduce the potential for restoring this carbon in the future.
~~
~~
The simplest way to think about why meat produces more emissions is in terms of the efficiency of converting grain to edible meat. Or even more, plant protein to animal protein.[/font]
(more)
[font size="3"] the article points out that chickens convert plant protein to animal protein (meat) at a conversion efficiency of 20%. Cattle's conversion efficiency is ...4%.
Now, I don't think it's realistic for many of us to try to become complete vegetarians, but if we each just cut back on Beef say, 10% that would help the planet. Then, maybe after getting used to cutting back 10%, after a while people might think about cutting back another 10%!.. and so on..
[/font]
= new reply since forum marked as read
From beetles to stinkbugs, people in dozens of countries eat insects.
Insects, like these fried locusts on display in a market, are a popular snack in a number of countries.
Why eat something that we usually swat away or battle with insecticides? For starters, many insects are packed with protein, fiber, good fats, and vital minerals—as much or more than many other food sources.
And raising and harvesting insects requires much less land than raising cows, pigs, and sheep. Insects convert food into protein much more efficiently than livestock do—meaning they need less food to produce more product. They also emit considerably fewer greenhouse gases than most livestock (think gassy cows).
link
