When Livestock Farming Becomes Key of the Environmental Problem
开篇：润墨网以专业的文秘视角，为您筛选了一篇When Livestock Farming Becomes Key of the Environmental Problem范文，如需获取更多写作素材，在线客服老师一对一协助。欢迎您的阅读与分享！
In 2006， a 408-page UN report called The Long Shadow of Livestock pointed out that meat industry is one of those who are most responsible for global warming， and its emission of greenhouse gas is more than the sum of that of planes， cars， trucks， ferries and other means of transportation. The point is that until now， the awareness of the masses is very weak.
The impact of livestock farming on the environment cannot be neglected
In December， the representatives of many countries will gather in Paris will reach an agreement that the global temperature rise should be controlled within 2℃. Before that， the governments should solve their disputes in technologies and laws and set regulations for the emission amount they are willing to promise after 2020. In fact， the course has already been carried out. In October last year， EU announced that by 2030， its goal of reduction of emission amount is at least 40% lower than that of 1990； after a few weeks， China and the U.S jointly issued a declaration on climate change saying that the U.S. planed to lower its emission of greenhouse gas to the level which is 26% to 28% compared with that of 2005 and China will reach its peak of carbon emissions by 2030.
However， while the plan on climate change by international community gradually takes shape， a loophole is highlighted， and unfortunately， it is not small. The emission of livestock farming accounts for some 15% in global carbon emissions， more than the total emissions of all the cars， trucks， planes， trains and ships in the world， however， in different international and national emission reduction strategies， apparently livestock farming is not taken into consideration.
In fact， the impact of livestock farming on climate change and the environment is not a new topic. As early as 2006， the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization （FAO） released a report entitled Livestock's Long Shadow， pointing out that livestock farming is one of the main causes of deforestation， with 70% of the world's farmland， and 30% of the ice free surface area used for livestock farming. It also estimated that if the current trends did not change， the total amount of livestock will double in 2050.
In 2009， two environmental consultants of the World Bank wrote a cover story entitled Livestock and Climate Change in the World Watch Magazine in November / December 2009， pointing out： greenhouse gases （GHGs） of livestock accounted for at least 51% of total anthropogenic emissions.
Methane is the most important part of these gases， followed by black carbon and Nitrous Oxide. Methane is produced in the digesting process of ruminants such as cows， sheep and goats. Nitrous Oxide is produced from fertilizer and chemical fertilizer that are used to cultivate fodder crops； and the forest which is transformed to pasture or used to plant fodder crops will produce lots of carbon dioxide.
Of all the human activities， livestock is the largest source of methane emissions， with an emission of over 37%. According to the average number of 20 years， the heat produced by methane is 72 times more than that of carbon dioxide. According to the average number of 5 years， methane will be stronger and will let out a heat which is at least 100 times more than that of carbon dioxide. At the same time， methane can get away from the atmosphere within ten years while carbon dioxide will keep the global warming for hundreds of years， or even thousands of years.
These figures all indicate that to stop global warming and make the earth cool down as soon as possible， human beings should focus on reducing methane emissions. If by 2017， the total amount of livestock can fall by 25%， then the emission reduction can reach the goal which was set in United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen in December 2009. This change will also bring other benefits， such as increasing the prospects for sustainable development， solving the global water crisis， hunger， energy crisis and other issues fundamentally， as well as reducing the suffering of animals. According to the article， in order not to pass the tipping point， the governments must formulate and implement the policies and procedures that will reduce the total amount of the livestock by 25% by 2017. On the basis of reducing the total amount of livestock， as well as emission reduction in other aspects， most climate experts believe that greenhouse gas emission will soon be reduced by 50%， and then 80%.
Vegetarians can save the world？
Environmental experts， including the author of the report of United Nations Environment Programme in July 2010 all recommend： reducing the output and consumption of livestock products is of great importance to the control of international greenhouse gas emission. Moreover， no livestock or environmental experts believe that greenhouse gas emission problems caused by increase of the total amount of livestock can be solved by the technological innovation in production alone.
The present need of people for meat and dairy products means： there are 22 billion chickens in the world， i.e. three per person； judged by weight， the most dominant species on earth is cow. The problem is that the consumption of meat and dairy products has been rising. Compared with the reference value between 2005 and 2007， by 2050， the consumption of meat and dairy products worldwide is expected to rise by 76% and 65% respectively. Recent modeling estimates suggest that the trend of human diet runs counter to the target of limiting the temperature rise within 2℃.
Environmentalists who strongly support vegetarianism believe that the greater the reduction of meat consumption of human is， the faster the earth becomes cooler. One of the most effective ways to reduce methane emissions and quickly stop and reverse global warming is to develop a vegetable-based diet habit and reduce the consumption of animal products. According to report of the University of Chicago in 2006， the reduction amount of greenhouse gas emissions of one vegetarian in 1 year is more than that of diving Prius， the hybrid car of the Toyota instead of other cars. "In the developed world， the most effective way to reduce the environmental impact of diet， on a personal basis， is to become vegetarian or vegan，" says Annette Pinner， chief executive of the Vegetarian Society in the UK.
All agriculture damages the environment - think of all those felled forests and ploughed-up prairies， all the irrigation water， manure， tractor fuel， pesticides and fertiliser. Agriculture produces more greenhouse gases than all methods of transport put together， and contributes to a host of other problems， from nitrogen pollution to soil erosion.
Livestock farming does the largest damage. In the part， that is because most livestock eat grain that could be used to feed people. As little as 10 per cent of that grain gets converted into meat， milk or eggs， so livestock amplify the environmental impact of farming by forcing us to grow more grain than we would otherwise need.
As a rough measure of how much more， consider that livestock consume about a third of the world's grain crop. So as a first approximation， a vegan world would need only two-thirds of the cropland used today. That's only part of the story， of course： meat and milk make up about 15 per cent of calories eaten by humans， so we would need to eat more grain to compensate for their loss. Altogether， switching to a vegan diet would reduce the amount of land used for crops by 21 per cent - about 3.4 million square kilometres， roughly the size of India.
Such a reduction would have a huge effect on the environmental impact of farming. Take nitrogen pollution， which can lead to eutrophication in lakes as an example. As a small-scale illustration， environmental scientist Allison Leach of the University of Virginia in Charlottesville calculated that if everyone at her university cut out meat from their diet， it would reduce the university's nitrogen footprint - the amount of nitrogen released to the environment from all activities - by 27 per cent. This is largely because of reductions in fertiliser use and the amount of nitrogen leaching from manure. If everyone went a step further and eliminated dairy products and eggs as well， Leach found that the university's nitrogen footprint would fall by 60 per cent.
It's not just in terms of nitrogen that livestock impact the environment. Global statistics are hard to come by， but in the US at least， livestock account for 55 per cent of soil erosion and 37 per cent of pesticide use. As well as that， half of all antibiotics manufactured are fed to livestock， often as part of their normal diet， a practice that is leading to antibiotic resistance in bacteria.
That's not all. Livestock is also a major source of greenhouse gases. Much of this comes in the form of methane - an especially potent greenhouse gas - produced by microbes in the guts of grazers such as cattle and sheep， and eventually belched out to the atmosphere. Livestock farming also accounts for a lot of carbon dioxide， mostly from forests being cut down for pasture， or when overgrazing and the resulting soil erosion causes a net loss of carbon from soils. When you add all this together， livestock accounts for a whopping 18 per cent of all greenhouse gas emissions as measured in CO2 equivalents， according to Livestock's Long Shadow， a 2006 FAO report. Eliminating livestock would certainly make a big difference in efforts to control global warming.
Just how big a difference depends on what replaces the livestock and the land it grazes. Certainly， where pastures revert to forests - particularly in areas like the Amazon basin， for example， where 70 per cent of deforested land is now pasture - the regrowing forest will sequester huge amounts of carbon. The American plains， too， would accumulate carbon in their soil if grazing stopped. But in sub-Saharan Africa， any reduction in methane from domestic grazers is likely to be at least partially offset by increased emissions from wild grazers and termites， which compete with livestock for food. "It's certainly worth someone spending some time to look at that，" says Philip Thornton， an agricultural systems scientist with the International Livestock Research Institute.
The “Meat free Monday” movement
In environmental protection， the announcements of stars are usually more diversified and inspiring.
In 2012， Paul McCartney， a former member of the Beatles sent a letter to Christiana Figueres， Executive Secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on climate change （UNFCCC） and Abdullah Bin Hamad Al-Attiyah， Chairman of the eighteenth session of the Conference of the Parties， calling on attention to the contribution to global warming of focusing on livestock.
It was before Doha Climate Change Conference， COP18 that Paul McCartney wrote in the letter， "Despite increasing evidence showing that the growth of global meat industry has a serious impact on the environment， COP does not seem to have realized the impact of livestock on global warming. So I am calling on you to pay attention to the problem and take relevant policies and actions， for example， set a meat-free day in a week.
Paul McCartney is the main founder and promoter of the "Meat-free Monday" campaign. He was invited at the end of 2009 to deliver a speech at the hearing on global warming and the crop policy of EU， calling on EU to take action to reduce meat consumption. He said， "This （to have meat or not） is no longer a personal choice， it will affect the whole planet".
At that time， he launched the "Meat-free Monday" campaign to call on people slowly reduce the amount of meat they take in a mild way， and do some environmental protection while eating. He invited his superstar friends to promote the campaign together and ask people to get rid of meat every Monday. If people don't eat meat in one Monday， the amount of carbon dioxide emission will be reduced greatly， and in the long run， the accumulation forces of environmental protection can slow down the pace of climate change.
His action got the response of people from all over the world， including many famous environmentalists， such as Al Gore， Vice President of the U.S. and Rajendra Pachauri， Chair of IPCC and so on. In the past six years， an increasing number of countries and regions， and a growing number of businesses， restaurants and food suppliers participated in the launch. In many famous cities， such as in Ghent of Belgium， Bremen of Germany， San Francisco and Los Angeles of the U.S. and so on， people have meat-free day every week. The American civil society founded a Meat-free Monday Association， and sent a meat-free menu to netizens every Monday， which got the support of a number of medical schools. From Manhattan， New York to Tel Aviv， Israel， from Stockholm， Sweden to Kaohsiung， Taiwan， China， "Meat-free Monday" movement has been launched and implemented in countless schools， hospitals and restaurants in the world. In November 2013， the Norwegian army asked their soldiers to be vegetarian for day every week to deal with a new enemy： climate change.
In mainland China， in order to promote the concept that vegetarianism can protect the ecological balance and reduce carbon emissions， Gao Yuanyuan， Liang Wendao， Zeng Li， Zheng Jun， Back Dorm Boys， Peng Tan， Terry Lin and some average people joined famous singer Long Kuan， who launched a short video called " Please be a vegetarian on Monday" to call on people to have vegetables， have meat-free Monday and devote themselves to environmental protection； Li Yixiang and Zhou Xun called on people to start from a meat-free day in a week to reduce carbon emissions. In addition， Huang Junpeng， Zhang Lei， Tang Yifei， Lan Ching Lung and Chen Kun are also responders of environmentally friendly vegetarianism.
What role does technological innovation play？
Although the theoretical evidence is adequate， the "vegetarianism saves the earth" theory fails to change the mind of everyone. After all， it is not easy to change people's diet structure and make them get rid of meat and dairy products. Especially when many governments and policymakers think the authorities should not promote the idea strongly-- trying to change the public's diet structure can be a too complex challenge or even interference with people's freedom of choose their way of life.
In September 2013， the latest research of UN Food and Agriculture Organization pointed out that through more extensive utilization of the existing best practices and technologies， the reduction of greenhouse gas emission of livestock sector can be as high as 30%. The report shows us the possibility of more improvements in the reduction of emission of livestock. The report entitled Tackling Climate Change Through Livestock： a Global Assessment of Emissions and Mitigation is the most comprehensive evaluation so far on the effect of livestock on global warming and its potential of helping the sector to solve the problem.
The report points out that the greenhouse gas emissions associated with the supply chain of livestock is amounted to 71 tons of CO2-eq， or 14.5% of the total greenhouse gas emissions caused by human. The annual amount of methane of livestock is equivalent to that of some 1.44 tons of petroleum， which is sufficient for the electricity supply for the entire South American. Of the greenhouse gases emitted by livestock， 45% is produced during the process of production of fodder， while 39% is the gas emitted by the animals， and the remaining is from the processing and transportation of animal products. The report argues that the current emission reduction methods， such as improving the menu of livestock， raising cattle with less stomach gas and so on， 30% of the emission can be reduced， so it urged the industry to implement it immediately.
In order to obtain these estimated statistics， FAO did a detailed analysis of the greenhouse gas emission of different stages of the livestock supply chain， including the production and transportation of animal fodder， utilization of farm resources， and the emission of the process of animal digestion and manure decomposition， as well as the transportation of butchered animal products， storage and packaging.
With a thorough investigation of emissions source and emission means， the report shows that animal producers are expected to achieve large-scale emission reductions. By promoting best practices and technologies in feeding， health and livestock and manure management， such as biogas generator and energy-saving equipment， which has not been fully utilized to improve efficiency and reduce energy waste， the reduction of greenhouse gas emission of global livestock sector can up to 30%.
The report of FAO argues that a substantial reduction in all species， systems and the region can be achieved. Among them the largest potential of emission reduction lies in South Asia， Latin America and Africa， where the ruminant livestock system has very low productivity. However， in the developed countries， although the emission intensity is relatively low， the emissions are high due to the large scale of the whole production. Despite slightly reduced emission intensity， the accumulation can have large impact. Examples include cow breeding in Europe and North America and pig breeding in East Asia. Cattle industry accounts for 65% of total greenhouse gas emissions， but the potential of its emission reduction is also the largest.
The agenda identifies three key areas of priority and the means to achieve significant achievements by improving production methods： to promote more efficient practices， improve grassland management as well as manure management.
Is artificial food a new opportunity？
Reducing carbon emissions of livestock by technological innovation and its utilization in production still needs some time， and as what is mentioned above， it is not easy to adjust the diet structure of ordinary people， so is there other ways？
Meat grown artificially in labs could be a greener alternative for consumers who cannot bear to go vegetarian but want to cut the environmental impact of their food， according to new research.
According to the analysis by scientists from Oxford University and Amsterdam University， lab-grown tissue would reduce greenhouse gases by up to 96% in comparison to raising animals. The process would require between 7% and 45% less energy than the same volume of conventionally produced meat such as pork， beef， or lamb， and could be engineered to use only 1% of the land and 4% of the water associated with conventional meat.
Aside from its predicted environmental benefits， lab-cultured meat should also provide cheap nutrition， and would help improve animal welfare as well as potentially taking huge pressure off farmland around the world.The researchers believe their work suggests artificial meat could help feed the growing world population while reducing the impact on the environment.
Animal protein is an increasing part of diets， as millions of people in rapidly emerging economies such as China and India are drawn out of poverty and become able to afford more meat in their diets. The pressure this creates has been an important factor in rapidly rising grain prices， deforestation in the Amazon， increasing water scarcity and rising pressure to find new farmland， leading to ＼"land grabs＼" where countries such as China buy up farmland in poorer nations.
To produce artificial meat， one should first take several cells from the animal. Then make the cells divide and replicate them during cell cultivation until millions of cells become billions. Then induce the cells to produce collagen， extend the cells and collagen to flakes， and stack up the flakes like making pastries， then it is done after a brief processing. The whole process is painless for animals.
Artificial meat has attracted the attention of Li Jiacheng， an entrepreneur of Hong Kong. According to the report of Wall Street Journal last year， Li Jiacheng invested 10 million USD in a technology company which can make meat products with 3D printing. Previously， the artificial eggs he invested was said to have landed the supermarket stores in Hong Kong.
It seems that in the near future， the food innovation led by technology may also be a major promoter of livestock revolution.