I will be addressing the act of removing beef from one’s diet to help reduce the demand for beef, which overall helps mitigate Climate Change. My position is that one should remove beef entirely from their diet, or at least reduce their consumption of beef raised in a feed-lot system. I personally do not consume beef. People might not agree with this lifestyle, they may like having beef in their meals, or do not believe that cows are a large source of methane as a greenhouse gas. I plan to address those concerns with alternate options and compelling evidence. I will also be touching on how to start cutting beef out of your diet if you want to make a difference.

2. Why Is This Important?

When carbon is emitted into the air, it remains in the atmosphere for centuries, between 300 and 1,000 years (10). This surplus of greenhouse gasses in the air gets trapped in the atmosphere and absorbs radiation and heat as it attempts to radiate from Earth. It is proven that the amount of greenhouse gasses is directly correlated with the global temperature on the Earth. This has caused the average temperature of the world to increase slowly over the past few decades, since the Industrial Revolution. The Industrial Revolution marked the beginning of humans releasing over 34 billion tonnes each year of emissions into the atmosphere because of our production of goods and machinery (16). We cannot go back in time and undo the amount humans have released, however, we can take preventative measures so we do not release detrimental amounts. Beef and dairy account for 14-18% of human greenhouse gas emissions (7). The US is the highest beef producing nation in the world, making up 17% of total beef production (7). People tend to think that they cannot make a difference by making such a small change, but if everyone thinks that way, nothing will improve. Climate change affects everyone, and if you are able, you should try to contribute in more ways than one.

3. Cows and Their Production of Greenhouse Gasses

According to Global Change Biology, “Beef and dairy contribute over 70% of livestock greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), which collectively contribute ~6.3 Gt CO2-eq/year (Gerber et al., 2013; Herrero et al., 2016)”. Beef production produces 2-9 times as many greenhouse gasses as any other animal product (14). The three major options for reducing the amount of greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere from beef production are productivity improvements with livestock, implementing the best practices to produce beef, and changing the human diet. Places where the demand for beef is low, the average greenhouse gas emissions produced is also lower.

An additional problem with raising cattle and producing beef is feeding all of these animals. Estimates state that “if the crops grown for animal feed and biofuel were instead directly consumed by humans, at a global level approximately 70 % more calories would be available in the global food system” (14). That means three billion more people could be fed with just the calories being fed to beef producing cattle. This animal feed also takes up about 33% of the world’s land that is suitable for growing crops of any kind (14). 

4. What Changes Can YOU Make?

         There are a few topics of achievable changes I’m going to review. My main focus will be the benefits of changing your diet. However, if that is something that you may not consider doing, then I will also be discussing the benefits of productivity and livestock management

A. Productivity

One way to increase productivity in livestock product manufacturing is to improve the feed-ratio. Larger shares of rations should contain protein and energy rich feed by including natural grazing systems or human provided feed. This also helps the milk-yield, which means less cows are required to produce the expected yield. Studies show that an increase in productivity is limited in dairy and meat sectors as opposed to vegetable sectors (3). Increasing productivity is not going to solve this problem as a whole. Plus the initial capital to increase productivity is expensive. People aren’t usually willing to spend more money if they can get something more or less effective for a lesser price. For example, the beef produced with higher productivity is more expensive compared to the cheaper and more accessible beef raised on grain-feed lots.  This is also something that an individual person can’t control, this method is for the people at the top of the beef-producing chain, like managers and farmers. 

Another option for increased productivity is using specific breeds of cattle. Cows are healthier and more productive in a pasture-grazing method. Different genotypes of cows are better suited for different pasture-based systems because of environmental variation (3).  Using dairy cows, for example, would significantly increase productivity. Not only are we getting dairy products from these cows, like milk and cheese, but they also produce calves for veal. However, it is important for me to note that I am highly against eating veal because I don’t like the thought of killing baby cows

B. Livestock Management

Recently, the IPCC (International Panel on Climate Change) called for improved livestock management to not only mitigate climate change, but improve biodiversity, animal welfare, and ecosystem services (3). In the paper Reducing climate impacts of beef production: A synthesis of life cycle assessments across management systems and global regions, researchers used Life Cycle Assessments (LCA).  LCAs measure environmental impacts, to account for information across land-based carbon sequestration methods, like integrated field management and intensive rotational grazing. Integrated field management (IFM) is a form of agricultural management using carbon-rich organic compost or intercropping feed plants with trees. Intensive rotational grazing (IRG) promotes better plant growth, forage quality, and carbon sequestration during field recovery. IFM had the most significant difference in reduction of emissions, and was the only strategy that could have the possibility of zero emissions (3). These methods encourage increased energy intake in the beef produced, which is important for dietary energy. Not only are the cows receiving more nutrients and having a healthier lifestyle, but the humans who consume them are benefited as well.

        If you don’t want to give up beef but still want to contribute, you can research what brands have products that are made more sustainably before grocery shopping. However, not everyone has access to the stores or financial resources that sell these high-cost certain brands. And obviously, most people are too lazy to take the time to do the research and even find what these brands are. 

C. Changing Your Diet

         Researchers, like Dr. Daniella Cusak, Associate Professor in the Department of Ecosystem Science & Sustainability at Colorado State University, has said that changes to our diet are necessary for mitigating climate change, like eating less processed food, more locally grown and organic foods (3). I’m arguing that unless you can get it sustainably raised, you should take beef out of your diet completely. Dr. Montse Marquès, is a research fellow at the Laboratory of Toxicology and Environmental Health and Lecturer of Environmental and Food Toxicology of the Faculty of Medicine and Health Science, at the Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Reus, Catalonia, Spain. She studied the effects of beef in a human’s diet. The essence of Marquès’s argument is that if we substitute beans for beef, then we can reduce up to 74% of greenhouse gas reductions and free up 42% of the United States cropland (1.6 times the surface area of California). They concluded after analysis and equations that substituting beans for beef in a US diet would reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 334 million metric tons per year. Plant based products have advantages such as less depletion of natural resources, reduced GHG emissions, and less noncommunicable diseases, which are chronic diseases that cannot be passed from person to person. (5)

This is a visual representation of how climate change connects to the human diet containing beef. The basis of beef consumption in our diets increases the amount of emissions released into the atmosphere, which has increased the rate of climate change, which leads to more disease and health problems. 

Daily calories achieved from beef can be replaced with 188 grams of black beans, and could reduce chronic diseases like heart disease, diabetes, obesity, and meat related cancers like colon and rectum cancer. The consumption of beef has also been proven to cause higher rates of antibiotic resistance (5). But how is anyone going to give up beef if they like it? Policy innovation, incentives, and experimentation in marketing would have to be done to try and get people to make this transition.

How can I remove beef from my diet permanently?

Dieting is hard, but forming a plan and sticking to it is a great way to achieve your end goal. Dr. Christian A. Klöckner, a professor in social psychology and quantitative methods at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, created a stage model of voluntary food choice changes, specifically beef consumption, that goes through pre-decision, decision, action, and post-action as a way of changing your diet.

Pre-decision: The individual has to identify why they should or want to reduce their consumption of beef. Usually this is triggered by moral obligation or personal awareness of their actions. If a person becomes aware enough of the negative consequences of eating beef, then theoretically, they would develop a personal responsibility to reduce their own beef consumption (9).

Decision (Pre-action): After Pre-decision, it is time to decide what your action will consist of. Examples of this are reducing portion size, substituting beef with other meats or seafood, or using vegan and vegetarian options. Once the individual recognizes all their options, they need to gauge how they feel about each option and pick something that they feel like they can stick to (9).

Action: The individual plans their action and follows through with their program of change. For example, someone goes to a restaurant and intends to order fish and chips instead of a hamburger, and then they do (9).

Post-action: This is when you keep repeating this action until it becomes a habit. If there is a lapse in the behavior, usually you either try to continue with this program of change or try another (9).

To evaluate the application of the stage model, a survey was taken of people over the age of eighteen in Norway, and the subjects were asked about how many times they ate meat a week and what their portion sizes were. They had to select a certain mindset about how they felt about reducing the amount of beef they consume. The results of this study yielded that there was a significant relationship between the participant’s goal intentions and behavioral intentions with reducing portion sizes (9). 

Figure 8 shows that there was a greater than 50% reduction in beef consumption once the participant reached the post-action stage. This study concluded that someone is more likely to commit to this change in behavior if they make a personal intention to do so. Other factors like social pressures, or relevance to the other people in their daily life may also push them to feel a greater personal obligation to follow through with their intentions. It also showed that the post-action stage was the most important for making tangible, significant changes to their diet.

         So throughout the blog the emphasis has been on removing beef from your diet, but why not dairy products like milk as well? The proteins in beef are much more easily replaced than dairy milk. Over the past few years, the demand for milk alternatives has significantly increased, like oatmilk, soymilk, almondmilk, peamilk, etc. Be that as it may, those alternatives are not as nutritionally sufficient. The plant derived products lack immunoglobulins, which are proteins that function as antibodies for your immune system.  Cow milk also contains “bioactive components, milk enzymes, bioactive peptides… oligosaccharides, organic acids, lactoferrin, nucleotides, milk vitamins, and minerals, and so on”, which are not included in the plant-based alternatives and are hard to replace with supplements (12). The uptrend of non-dairy milk is more a response to allergies and lactose intolerance than for the purpose of benefiting the environment. Also, it is my view that dairy products are more sustainably made, because when harvesting beef, you can only do it once from a single cow. With milk, you can generate recurring products from one cow, multiple times over its life. Harvesting a cow for milk in this way is clearly more productive than harvesting beef from a cow once. Most times, you can use the same cow for a very long period of time if you are working to keep them healthy.

5.             Counter Arguments

Although there is significant evidence and facts that reducing your consumption of beef can help mitigate climate change, some people are still not convinced. Don Dodd Diles, a writer from Western Farm press, has quite the opinion. After dismissing all of the claims that “militant vegans and young politicians” make, he claims “the actual methane emissions from cows are about 2% of the total, and compared to the other ruminant animals on our planet, nearly inconsequential” (2), and claims that termites are the largest source of methane. However, he has no proof of his claims. No references, no studies, nothing. For all we know, he made up this information! Granted, termites do release methane into the atmosphere because of the bacteria in their stomachs. He is incorrect about his percentages, many studies that I have referenced in this paper report that cows contribute about 14-18% of human greenhouse gas emissions. Diles goes on to talk about cow’s importance to the carbon cycle, and how that cancels out their contribution to the greenhouse gas emissions in the atmosphere (2). Although cows may be important for carbon sequestration if they are free range, if they are being raised in a feedlot system, while emissions are lowered when cows can roam free range in a pasture system, they are prohibited from roaming around the field and actually sequestering the carbon into the soil. Overall, all of the points Diles makes is an opinion, where his points are either poorly supported or poorly thought out. After thorough research, I wasn’t able to  find any kind of information on this person, which renders his opinion even less credible.

Jason Cholewa, an assistant professor of exercise science at Coastal Carolina University, also agrees with Diles, that we should not give up beef, but more so for health reasons. Beef contains protein, zinc, iron, and vitamin B, which all contribute to healthy muscle mass and cognitive functioning. However, he does acknowledge that saturated fat, which is often found in red meats like beef, is bad for your health (1). He references a study where they had a reduced beef intake of 1 oz a day and a diet of 5 oz a day, and the results showed no difference in cholesterol. He also highlights how unprocessed meat has a lower cancer causing risk than processed meat, which is true. After reviewing the study he mentioned, he concludes that three to four servings of red meat, including beef, are beneficial to older adults by preserving muscle mass, enhanced physical health without negatively impacting the cardiovascular system (1). Although he makes some relevant claims, there isn’t much evidence backing it up. He provides references at the bottom of his paper, but leaves it up to the reader to confirm the credibility.   Although he does make some truthful claims, it isn’t enough to argue that we should clearly keep beef in our daily eating habits. Also, just because beef and red meat provide these benefits, doesn’t mean that other foods can’t as well! As I mentioned above, beans are a great substitute for beef because it has loads of proteins and vitamins.

We know how some people feel about not being able to eat certain foods if they give up beef. But it’s ingrained in many foods and products, what will happen to the economy if people stop purchasing beef? António Cardoso Marques, a researcher from the University of Beira Interior, Portugal, conducted a study analyzing food consumption with economic growth in Europe, and found there to be negative effects on the economy. These effects were caused by an increase of imports, because of the increased consumption of green products. Other results yield that a 50% decrease in meat consumption could result in a 4% decrease in GDP (13).  However, it was noticed that environmental degradation and economic growth had a positive correlation until a certain point. With more economic growth, the average income starts to increase. This is when environmental degradation caused by humans starts to decrease (13). I theorize that it is because people can afford to start using sustainable practices, which can be expensive. This pattern is often seen with developing countries, according to Marques, because they tend to adopt the phrase “grow now, clean later” (13). Overall, the economy would be negatively affected by this lack of beef consumption, however, it can be managed by an increase in plant based products.

6.           Supply and Demand of Beef

Beef is one of the most popular meats to purchase, because of its cost efficiency, accessibility, and nutritional value. But how are we ever supposed to reduce the amount of beef supplied if the demand continues to increase? Through research, two options have been proposed to help the challenge of reducing the demand for beef, productivity and diet changes. Changing the demand side of things would have quick results, because companies will stop producing products if people don’t want them. Addressing the supply, if farmers worked on only producing sustainably raised and healthier beef, they could reduce the supply that they provide, while increasing the quality, which may help them maintain profits (14). A way to encourage this activity would be certain kinds of incentives, because most people care about the amount of money they make, or how it benefits them. Another approach would be making the packaged portions of beef available in smaller quantities, or substituting a percentage of burgers and other meat products with beans or other plant based proteins (14). Overall, I believe that the demand side is more influential than the supply side. Companies typically cater to what the consumers, and what will assure their profitability. It  would clearly require education and a shift in public sentiment or desire to change the demand for beef. When the amount of beef being made is reduced, it can then result in reducing the negative effects on the environment.

7.               Conclusion

         Key points I have made in this blog include:

1. Climate change is happening now! Something has to be done.
2. Cows and beef production are large contributors to greenhouse gas emissions
3. The world can combat this by making change, in our production of dairy and beef such as:
   • Increasing the productivity of beef by improving the feed-ratio and breeds of cattle raised.
   • Ranchers can change the methods by which cattle are raised for beef production, so that they are free range and enhance carbon sequestration, and we as consumers can accelerate this change. 
   • You can personally go further to accelerate this change; by not eating beef; reducing the amount you consume; or being careful of how the beef you consume is raised
4. People have their oppositions to totally removing beef from their diet, but there is no denying that reducing our beef consumption overall will benefit the environment.
5. To make a difference with beef production and supply, it starts with us, the consumers. We have the power to reduce and change the demand for beef and reduce its negative impacts on the environment. 

Overall, the world’s current high levels of beef consumption have negative impacts on the environment. Reducing our meat and dairy consumption would have the highest impact on greenhouse gas emissions when compared to any other food source. About a billion people, out of the seven billion people on this planet, are already vegans or vegetarians (5). 

Studies have shown that people of lower socioeconomic status have limited means to accessing a diet that is healthier and free of beef. Although we are all college students and have somewhat limited access to food, depending on the meal plan you follow here at Bucknell University, we are privileged enough to be educated here. Use this education to do some good for yourself and the world! After reading this blog, consider all the facts. There is no denying that your personal health could clearly benefit from eating less beef. You may now be thinking: how am I, one person, going to make an impact by reducing or cutting out beef? Well, if everyone thought that way, nothing would ever change. Everyone can take a small step and make a big difference in helping mitigate climate change. Adjusting your diet may just be that first and easy step you can take!

At the end of the day, this is our only planet! It’s hard to fathom some of the negative effects of climate change that are already here: like hotter temperatures, increased drought, more severe storms and weather patterns, rising sea levels, and loss of biodiversity (16). It’s even harder to imagine that those things that are happening in our lifetime have already started gaining momentum. It may be asking a lot, but take a step back and think about the generations to come in the future. What kind of Earth are you leaving to them? What about our future generations? This problem was started by humans, and it can only be solved by humans. The older generation may not care as much, because they won’t be around for the aftermath. But as the younger generation, we can and we must take action, which can start with a simple diet change. We may not be able to change global policies or how beef is produced now, but this simple act can start much more.

References

1. Bring on the Beef. (2014, October 11). Jason Cholewa – Assistant Professor of Exercise Science at Coastal Carolina University. https://jasoncholewa.com/2014/10/11/bring-on-the-beef/
2. Cows are not the problem. (2022, September 2). Western Farm Press, NA. https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A715941254/GRNR?u=bucknell_it&sid=bookmark-GRNR&xid=5e292110
3. Cusack, D. F., Kazanski, C. E., Hedgpeth, A., Chow, K., Cordeiro, A. L., Karpman, J., & Ryals, R. (2021). Reducing climate impacts of beef production: A synthesis of life cycle assessments across management systems and global regions. Global Change Biology, 27(9), 1721–1736. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.15509
4. González, N., Marquès, M., Nadal, M., & Domingo, J. L. (2020). Meat consumption: Which are the current global risks? A review of recent (2010–2020) evidences. Food Research International, 137, 109341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2020.109341
5. Harwatt, H., Sabaté, J., Eshel, G. et al. Substituting beans for beef as a contribution toward US climate change targets. Climatic Change 143, 261–270 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-017-1969-1
6. Hedenus, F., Wirsenius, S., & Johansson, D. J. A. (2014). The importance of reduced meat and dairy consumption for meeting stringent climate change targets. Climatic Change, 124(1-2), 79–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-014-1104-5
7. Jamieson, D. (2009). Global climate change. In J. B. Callicott & R. Frodeman (Eds.), Encyclopedia of environmental ethics and philosophy (Vol. 1, pp. 458-463). Macmillan Reference USA.
8. Joseph, A. (2022, February 2). Easy Vegan Black Bean Burgers – no chopping required! Hummusapien. https://www.hummusapien.com/easy-vegan-black-bean-burgers/
9. Klöckner, C. A. (2017). A stage model as an analysis framework for studying voluntary change in food choices – The case of beef consumption reduction in Norway. Appetite, 108, 434–449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2016.11.002
10. NASA. (2022, January 13). The Effects of Climate Change. Global Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet; NASA. https://climate.nasa.gov/effects/
11. Pais, D. F., Marques, A. C., & Fuinhas, J. A. (2020). Reducing Meat Consumption to Mitigate Climate Change and Promote Health: but Is It Good for the Economy? Environmental Modeling & Assessment, 25(6), 793–807. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10666-020-09710-0
12. Park, Y. W. (2020). The impact of plant-based non-dairy alternative milk on the dairy industry. Food Science of Animal Resources. https://doi.org/10.5851/kosfa.2020.e82
13. Review: An overview of beef production from pasture and feedlot globally, as demand for beef and the need for sustainable practices increase. (2021). Animal, 100295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.animal.2021.100295
14. Stoll-Kleemann, S., & Schmidt, U. J. (2016). Reducing meat consumption in developed and transition countries to counter climate change and biodiversity loss: a review of influence factors. Regional Environmental Change, 17(5), 1261–1277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-016-1057-5
15. Subak, S. (1999). Global environmental costs of beef production. Ecological Economics, 30(1), 79–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(98)00100-1
16. United Nations. (2021). Climate Change. United Nations; United Nations. https://www.un.org/en/global-issues/climate-change
17. University of Nottingham Researchers Release New Data on Agronomy (The Case for Grazing Dairy Cows). (2022, January 13). Agriculture Week, 657. https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A689076396/GRNR?u=bucknell_it&sid=bookmark-GRNR&xid=5ac0e09b
18. Askinasi, R. (n.d.). We tasted and ranked 7 different types of dairy and non-dairy milks. Oat milk came in dead last. Insider. https://www.insider.com/types-of-milk-dairy-alternative-taste-test-best-worst
19. Daily meat consumption per person. (n.d.). Our World in Data. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/daily-meat-consumption-per-person
20. Ellis, C. (n.d.). Grazing management benefits cattle and deer. Noble Research Institute. Retrieved December 6, 2022, from https://www.noble.org/news/publications/ag-news-and-views/2014/october/grazing-management-benefits-cattle-and-deer/
21. Merrill, D., & Leatherby, L. (2019). Bloomberg – Are you a robot? Bloomberg.com. https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2018-us-land-use/
22. Organic 100% Grassfed 90/10 Ground Beef – 1lb – Good & Gather^TM. (n.d.). Www.target.com. Retrieved December 6, 2022, from https://www.target.com/p/organic-100-grassfed-90-10-ground-beef-1lb-good-38-gather-8482/-/A-23974825
23. Ritchie, H., & Roser, M. (2020). CO₂ and Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Our World in Data. https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions#:~:text=In%201950%20the%20world%20emitted
24. Union of Concerned Scientists. (2022, January 14). Each Country’s Share of CO2 Emissions. Union of Concerned Scientists. https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/each-countrys-share-co2-emissions
25. Vegan, C. is. (2019, July 19). Beef vs Beans: How Vegans Deceive. Carnivore Is Vegan. https://www.carnivoreisvegan.com/beef-vs-beans-how-vegans-deceive/
26. Ktena, N. (2018, May 25). Cow cuddling – the new wellness trend coming to a field near you. BBC Three. https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/article/f3077982-4f1c-4b40-81be-7f96c4235334