Explainer: Why Is Beef Bad for the Planet? (2024)

It’s no longer news that eating meat is bad for the planet. Study after study after study confirms how much pollution comes from the food system — emissions from meat and dairy make up around 14 percent of all global emissions, with 57 percent of food-related emissions coming just from meat.

Not only that, it’s impossible to reach the climate goals of the Paris Agreement — staying under 1.5 degrees Celsius of warming — without tackling the problem of how much beef we as a planet consume. It cannot be done.

Yet somehow consumers aren’t getting the message. A January 2023 survey from Purdue researchers found the belief that eating less meat is good for the environment is now at an “all-time low,” with only 46 percent of respondents in agreement. Perhaps what’s needed is a clear explanation of why exactly beef is bad for the environment. There are a few reasons why, in fact, but in the simplest of terms, it all comes down to burps and land.

The Biology of Cows

Cows belong to a category of animals called ‘ruminants.’ Under the suborder Ruminantia, this category also includes creatures like goats, sheep, giraffes, deer and buffalo. Ruminants eat grass, have hooves and — here’s the important point for climate emissions — have four stomachs in which to digest their food.

Inside these stomachs is where the magic happens. The grass goes into the rumen, the first stomach, where it ferments the food to begin breaking it down. After a while, the cow partially regurgitates the food, now called cud, and then chews it even more, which hastens the cellular breakdown. The food then flows into the other three stomachs where it is digested through microorganisms.

This is great news for the cow — the process of enteric fermentation enables ruminants to eat all sorts of roughage that humans couldn’t ever (or at least wouldn’t ever want to) digest. But, here’s the kicker, the process also creates a harmful byproduct calledmethane.

Methane is an exceptionally potent greenhouse gas, having 80 times the warming power in the first twenty years of its release into the atmosphere as compared to carbon dioxide. Methane disperses or breaks down faster than carbon dioxide, but it also does more damage while it’s here.

Cows, because of their distinct biology, produce a lot of this dangerous methane when they digest their food. A single cow can produce up to 500 liters of methane a day. Today, the ranching industry breeds as many as 1.5 billion cows per year, and methane emissions from cattle are a real climate problem. In fact, methane is the second most abundant greenhouse gas found in the atmosphere, and 40 percent of all methane comes from agricultural sources, with livestock production directly responsible for 32 percent.

The good news is that the properties of methane — its relatively short span of existence in the atmosphere as compared to CO2 — also offer up a powerful opportunity for climate action. If we drastically reduce our methane emissions, we will start seeing the benefits in terms of drawing down emissions right away, and that buys us time to bring down more stubborn areas of climate pollution.

Land Use, Explained

Before we dive into how to reduce methane emissions, it’s important to understand the other part of beef farming that drives climate pollution: land use.

A whopping 77 percent of global farmland goes to raise livestock. Per gram of protein, beef and lamb require more land than any other protein to produce, according to analysis from Our World in Data.

The problem is we don’t have unlimited farmland, but we’re acting like we do. As the Earth’s population goes up, farmers end up expanding their operations in order to produce more food. Between 2000 and 2019, global farmland expanded by 9 percent, according to reporting in Science magazine. And when that expansion takes place in tropical rainforests and grasslands —which is exactly where it’s happening most often — the climate cost is especially painful.

Let’s dig into why. Wild landscapes like the Chiquitano rainforest and the Cerrado in Brazil are important carbon storage reservoirs, places where the earth sequesters or stores carbon, keeping it out of the atmosphere. In other words, these wild landscapes are kind of like built-in climate solutions — that’s why they’re often called nature-based climate solutions.

So, when we deforest a wild landscape, there are a couple of emissions to consider. First, the land releases the carbon that it was storing but there’s another loss too. Every year after that, that piece of deforested land has now lost its carbon-storing abilities.

Big picture: emissions keep going up but, thanks to that deforestation, we can no longer count on the carbon-storing offset of the land we’ve now turned into a farm or a ranch. Called the carbon opportunity cost by researchers, that loss makes the emissions associated with beef even higher.

Explainer: Why Is Beef Bad for the Planet? (1)

On the other hand, the potential to reverse that land loss is also pretty massive. If the whole world switched from animal-based agriculture to plant-based agriculture, we would get back more than 3 billion hectares, yes, billion with a b. To put that number into perspective, that’s the size of Brazil. And Mexico. And Canada. And the entire United States, combined.

Now, due to the different biologies and geologies, not all of this land could be converted into plant-based agriculture suitable for humans, and that’s the point. Only a small portion would be needed to grow food for humans. The rest can be returned to nature to store carbon — not to mention serve as much-needed habitat for biodiverse species. According to a 2022 study, if wealthy nations switched from animal-based to plant-based, they’d reduce their emissions by over 60 percent and sequester almost 100 gigatons of carbon emissions.

What You Can Do: Shift to a Plant-Rich Diet

There is more than just climate emissions to consider. Ranching increases the risk and likelihood of the next pandemic, abuses antibiotics, kills 300 million cows globally per year and causes physical and emotional trauma for workers. Not to mention that its inherent inefficiency makes it prone to inflation and supply chain breakdowns during crises like war and pandemics.

All of these impacts are why it’s so important to boost public understanding of the climate impacts of meat. One of the most powerful forms of climate action is reducing meat consumption, especially red meat, in favor of a plant-rich diet. According to analysis from Project Drawdown, this type of dietary shift along with curbing food waste could reduce 12.4 percent of global emissions.

This piece has been updated.

Support Us

Independent Journalism Needs You

$

Donate»-opens in new tab.

Donate via PayPal

More options»

Explainer: Why Is Beef Bad for the Planet? (2024)

FAQs

Explainer: Why Is Beef Bad for the Planet? ›

Meat production significantly contributes to the release of greenhouse gases including carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide. As large volumes of these greenhouse gases accumulate in the earth's atmosphere, they absorb radiation and prevent heat escaping.

Why is beef so bad for the environment? ›

All told, beef is more resource-intensive to produce than most other kinds of meat, and animal-based foods overall are more resource-intensive than plant-based foods. Beef requires 20 times more land and emits 20 times more GHG emissions per gram of edible protein than common plant proteins, such as beans.

Why is eating beef a problem? ›

Eating too much red meat comes with health risks and is not part of a healthy diet,” says Stephen Hu, MD, a cardiologist at Scripps Clinic Carmel Valley. “Red meat is high in cholesterol, saturated fats and sodium. It should be eaten in a limited fashion.”

Why is beef worse than other meats? ›

Studies have shown that red meat raises the level of “bad cholesterol,” because it is high in saturated fat. Chicken and fish are much lower in saturated fat. While processed meat is labeled as a definite carcinogen, red meat is categorized as probably carcinogenic to humans (called Group 2A by IARC).

Is beef worse than chicken for the environment? ›

Chicken, for example, has a GHG footprint almost nine times lower than beef's – generating 5.7kg of CO2e per 100g of protein. That's "quite low", says Sarah Bridle, professor of food, climate and society at the University of York in the UK. "It is really similar to farmed fish and eggs."

Is flying worse than eating meat? ›

Flying is associated with relatively high greenhouse gas emissions. This is shown by a comparison with a vegetarian diet over one year. Only one round trip from Frankfurt to London outweighs the savings from the change in diet. A meat-based diet is associated with high CO2 emissions from livestock and feed production.

Is beef worse than pork for the environment? ›

When comparing beef and pork, studies estimate that beef production requires significantly more land and water resources compared to pork production. Beef production is estimated to require approximately 20 times more land and emits 11 times more greenhouse gases compared to pork production.

Is it better to not eat beef? ›

Put simply: It depends. Generally speaking, choosing white meat or vegetarian options is your best bet for living an overall healthier lifestyle. But the health benefits and consequences of red meat often boil down to what you're eating, how often and how much.

Is beef good for the planet? ›

It's no longer news that eating meat is bad for the planet. Study after study after study confirms how much pollution comes from the food system — emissions from meat and dairy make up around 14 percent of all global emissions, with 57 percent of food-related emissions coming just from meat.

What is the healthiest meat to eat? ›

While meat can be a part of a healthy diet, not all sources are created equal. The leanest and healthiest meats to eat include poultry, pork, fish, and seafood. Eating a balanced diet is one of the keys to a healthy lifestyle, which means choosing various foods from different food groups, like proteins.

What is the unhealthiest meat? ›

Hot dogs, bacon, sausage, and regular ground beef should be avoided or consumed sparingly due to their high fat, calorie, and sodium content, and potential health risks. By using this ranking system, you can make informed choices about the meats you eat and maintain a healthy diet.

Is beef the worst meat to eat? ›

Some red meats have high amounts of saturated fat, which can increase low-density cholesterol (LDL), or bad, cholesterol. Steak, ribs, pork chops, and ground beef contain higher LDL levels. People that consume higher amounts of red meat weekly have been associated with an increased risk of heart attacks and strokes.

Is chicken really healthier than beef? ›

Compared to beef, chicken is a better source of protein. As a result of its high-fat content, beef is a higher fat and higher calorie meat. Chicken has more vitamin A, vitamin E, vitamin K, vitamin B1, B3, and B5. However, beef is significantly higher in folate and vitamin B12.

What is the most ethical animal to eat? ›

Choose welfare-certified chicken and pork over beef and lamb. Source seafood that was farmed using sustainable fishing practices. Reduce how much meat, dairy and fish you eat overall.

What's the most environmentally friendly meat? ›

THE MOST SUSTAINABLE MEATS

These options include: Poultry — Poultry, like turkey and chicken, require less land, less feed, and less water than beef, making them a more sustainable option.

What is the most environmentally unfriendly meat? ›

Beef production is the most damaging for the environment, followed by pork, with poultry having the smallest impact, a wealth of studies show.

Can beef be environmentally friendly? ›

In addition, because grass-finished and grass-fed cattle don't rely as heavily on grain production, sustainable beef farming also contributes to lowering greenhouse gas emissions. Learn more about why it's essential to purchase beef that is both grass-fed AND grass-finished.

Is beef or dairy worse for the environment? ›

Cattle produce both methane and carbon dioxide, which also has damaging effects on the planet. In addition to this, dairy farming is a major source of nitrous oxide, a greenhouse gas with a global warming potential 265-298 times greater than carbon dioxide.

Why does beef produce so much CO2? ›

Meat products have larger carbon footprints per calorie than grain or vegetable products because of the inefficient transformation of plant energy to animal energy, along with the methane released from manure management and enteric fermentation in ruminants.

Is fish or beef worse for the environment? ›

The picture becomes more complicated when we compare meat to seafood and fish products. Seafood does tend to have a smaller carbon footprint than animal proteins, mostly because fishing does not require farmland and livestock rearing, but not always.

Top Articles
Latest Posts
Article information

Author: Saturnina Altenwerth DVM

Last Updated:

Views: 6081

Rating: 4.3 / 5 (44 voted)

Reviews: 91% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Saturnina Altenwerth DVM

Birthday: 1992-08-21

Address: Apt. 237 662 Haag Mills, East Verenaport, MO 57071-5493

Phone: +331850833384

Job: District Real-Estate Architect

Hobby: Skateboarding, Taxidermy, Air sports, Painting, Knife making, Letterboxing, Inline skating

Introduction: My name is Saturnina Altenwerth DVM, I am a witty, perfect, combative, beautiful, determined, fancy, determined person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.