In recent years, a global movement towards vegan diets has risen to prominence, driven by the idea that going vegan can help save the planet. Researchers have identified that vegans produce an environmental footprint that is at least one-third lower than those who eat meat. They are also responsible for 93% less methane, a greenhouse gas responsible for 25% of global warming.
These environmental benefits of veganism are exasperated by the problematic techniques through which meat is procured. Meat, eggs, dairy and aquaculture currently occupy 83% of the world’s available farmland yet are only responsible for 18% of calories and 37% of protein globally. Production for beef alone takes up 60% of available farmland and only provides 2% of calories and 5% of protein.
So, why don’t we all just go vegan? While these statistics are powerful on paper, a lot is being omitted from the conversation.
Firstly, a critical part of our diet’s impact on the environment is not just what we eat but where it comes from. Fruits and vegetables are not universally grown in every region, meaning that in order to have these foods available full-time, costly global transportation is required. For every pound of asparagus imported into the United Kingdom, approximately 5.3 pounds of carbon dioxide emissions are produced.
Secondly, the increased agricultural production needed to feed the world would have severe consequences. Approximately one-third more cropland would be required to produce enough food. Artificial fertilizers are responsible for 3% of greenhouse emissions, a number that would only rise with increased agricultural production. The tilling of fields has been estimated to release over 350 petagrams (or 350 billion metric tons) of carbon dioxide annually, which is more than 10 times that of fossil fuel combustion and the cement industry combined. In Peru and Chile, illegal water extraction from rivers for avocado production has resulted in water shortages, since 30–60 gallons of water are needed to grow a single avocado.
There are also societal ramifications to consider. Many cultures around the world place value on consuming meat, such as Indigenous tribes in Alaska who enjoy special rights to hunt and consume animals. If this tradition was erased, a part of their culture would go with it.
I am not denying that a significant proportion of the world going vegan would be beneficial for the environment. However, dietary changes must be sustainable long-term — it is infeasible to expect everyone on the planet to uproot their lifestyles. We can take strides against climate change that do not require massive sacrifice.
Simple practices like regenerative agriculture can offset the environmental costs of livestock. For example, research has shown that multispecies pasture rotation can provide meat while simultaneously regenerating land.
Livestock also consume crop waste that would otherwise go unused, such as the bran and germ that’s left over from milling flour. When I worked at Amber Waves Farm, we fed produce waste to the chickens, saving the scraps from being discarded in the trash.
More complex scientific solutions also exist, such as the cellular agriculture research being undertaken here at Tufts by the Kaplan Lab. Their work centers on finding ways to sustainably grow meat from cell cultures.
Forcing everyone to go vegan is not the only path to reducing the carbon footprint of our diet. Like any environmental issue, there are multiple ways to achieve a solution, not just one presiding narrative.
