Yes, eating meat affects the environment

As the scale and impacts of climate change become increasingly alarming, meat is a popular target for action. Advocates urge the public to eat less meat to save the environment. Some activists have called for taxing meat to reduce consumption of it.

Lets look at the first highlight here; it is taken from FORTUNE and examine it:

With America preparing to exit the Paris climate accord, mayors and governors are setting their own climate goals, protests are erupting, and social media is all atwitter. But the reality is that combating climate change is largely a matter of personal responsibility—and one of the easiest and best steps we can take concerns what we put on our plates.

Take protein, for example. Worldwide, over 80 billion land animals are farmed for food. To produce just a single pound of meat, those animals may each eat upwards of 15 pounds of feed—meaning mass meat production funnels far more resources through animals than it gets out of them. One report from the World Resources Institute found that even the most efficient sources of meat convert only around 11% of feed energy into human food.

So there we have it. These appear to be undisputed figures. We have to extract the truth out of so many voluminous writtings on the subject. Therefore it is certainly a lot more inefficient to eat meat than not eat it. Lets take another passage from Will de Freita’s article.

My research focuses on ways in which animal agriculture affects air quality and climate change. In my view, there are many reasons for either choosing animal protein or opting for a vegetarian selection.

However, foregoing meat and meat products is not the environmental panacea many would have us believe. And if taken to an extreme, it also could have harmful nutritional consequences.

This last paragraph is simply not true. If you know how to cook and eat a balanced diet (education) you do not need to eat meat to maintain optimum health.

So we can conclude that the closing of small Slaughter Houses in the UK is not a bad thing, rather it is a good thing for the environment and for the welfare of animals. The redundant staff should now be trained in the art of food production and so will still have a job……

1. • Again we have to support Will de Freitas’ statement

”But the reality is that combating climate change is largely a matter of personal responsibility—and one of the easiest and best steps we can take concerns what we put on our plates.”

 

Thank you Will for your observations.

If we take a look at the figures from the national database…