Comment on this Article

A Contrarian Take on Meat and Climate Change

Posted on August 17, 2009
by GOOD - Premier Partner SustainLane Premier Content Partners are part of a growing network of publishers bringing you the very best green content from across the web.

To read more articles by this Premier Partner, follow the link at the end of this post.

In Grist today, Farmer Eliot Coleman argues against the conventional wisdom that eating meat itself is a climate change problem.

If I butcher a steer for my food, and that steer has been raised on grass on my farm, I am not responsible for any increased CO2. The pasture-raised animal eating grass in my field is not producing CO2, merely recycling it (short term carbon cycle) as grazing animals (and human beings) have since they evolved. It is not meat eating that is responsible for increased greenhouse gasses; it is the corn/ soybean/ chemical fertilizer/ feedlot/ transportation system under which industrial animals are raised.

This distinction between processes that are a natural part of the short-term carbon cycle and those that release carbon from long-term storage is really significant and it doesn’t get discussed much. Of course, there are other arguments against meat that have to do with the efficient use of land.

Posted to GOOD by Andrew Price

GOOD is a collaboration of individuals, businesses, and nonprofits pushing the world forward. Since 2006 we've been making a magazine, videos, and events for people who give a damn.

Comments

post commentPost a comment:

Get Started

Write a Review Post to SustainLane Add Green Products & Businesses

Written by GOOD

GOOD

GOOD is a collaboration of individuals, businesses, and nonprofits pushing the world forward. Since 2006 we've been making a magazine, videos, and events for people who give a damn. More About GOOD »

Share eco-tips, news, how-tos,
or just blog it.

Post Now!
Advertisement