The other “Inconvenient Truth” — a message for the Church (and the world)
The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations has this article on their website:
http://www.fao.org/newsroom/en/news/2006/1000448/index.html
Unless you click on the link above, this is a long post. So, you might want to click on “Print-friendly version” at the top right to see it better.
On the positive side, here is an amazing acknowledgment and warning from a non-AR, non-Environmentalist group speaking clearly about the serious impact of animal agriculture on the environment, and more importantly (for those who consider it the most urgent issue of the day), Global Warming. Will people and governments sit up and take notice now? Will environmentalists be willing to include animal agriculture along with use of fossil fuels when they talk about our individual and collective footprints on Global Warming? Will environmentalists become the first new (non-AR or non-health conscious) group to voluntarily cut back, or totally eliminate meat and other animal products from their diets?
On the negative side, because the FOA doesn’t have an AR bias, they neglected to put forth the most obvious solution for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from animal agriculture — by recommending that people change their diet, to drastically reduce the number of “food” animals that need to be raised to keep up with our society’s demand. (That might be a conflict of interest for them to suggest. So the very thing that makes them most credible is the very thing that ignores the obvious.)
Regardless, this is an opportunity for Episcopalians who are concerned about the treatment of farmed animals, and/or about the environment, and/or about supporting MDGs to “make poverty history” to work together for a comprehensive common cause. (Why not involve the Peace and Justice people, the Office of Government Relations, and ERD, too, not to mention the Bishops of New England? The connection between animal agriculture and Global Warming adds an unexpected underlying potential for coalition-building in GC 2003 Resolution D016, which ought to encourage the Episcopal Church to work together toward solutions on various issues, instead of in its currently compartmentalized, and sometimes conflicting ways, by relatively small special interest groups and their supporters.)
the revealing of the children of God;
for the creation was subjected to futility, not of its own will
but by the will of the one who subjected it,
in hope that the creation itself will be set free
from its bondage to decay
and will obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God.”
– Romans 8:19-21
Livestock a major threat to environment
Remedies urgently needed
29 November 2006, Rome - Which causes more greenhouse gas emissions, rearing cattle or driving cars?
Surprise!
According to a new report published by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, the livestock sector generates more greenhouse gas emissions as measured in CO2 equivalent ñ 18 percent ñ than transport. It is also a major source of land and water degradation.
Says Henning Steinfeld, Chief of FAOís Livestock Information and Policy Branch and senior author of the report: ìLivestock are one of the most significant contributors to todayís most serious environmental problems. Urgent action is required to remedy the situation.î
With increased prosperity, people are consuming more meat and dairy products every year. Global meat production is projected to more than double from 229 million tonnes in 1999/2001 to 465 million tonnes in 2050, while milk output is set to climb from 580 to 1043 million tonnes.
Long shadow
The global livestock sector is growing faster than any other agricultural sub-sector. It provides livelihoods to about 1.3billion people and contributes about 40 percent to global agricultural output. For many poor farmers in developing countries livestock are also a source of renewable energy for draft and an essential source of organic fertilizer for their crops.
But such rapid growth exacts a steep environmental price, according to the FAO report, Livestockís Long Shadow ñEnvironmental Issues and Options. ìThe environmental costs per unit of livestock production must be cut by one half, just to avoid the level of damage worsening beyond its present level,î it warns.
When emissions from land use and land use change are included, the livestock sector accounts for 9 percent of CO2 deriving from human-related activities, but produces a much larger share of even more harmful greenhouse gases. It generates 65 percent of human-related nitrous oxide, which has 296 times the Global Warming Potential (GWP) of CO2. Most of this comes from manure.
And it accounts for respectively 37 percent of all human-induced methane (23 times as warming as CO2), which is largely produced by the digestive system of ruminants, and 64 percent of ammonia, which contributes significantly to acid rain.
Livestock now use 30 percent of the earthís entire land surface, mostly permanent pasture but also including 33 percent of the global arable land used to producing feed for livestock, the report notes. As forests are cleared to create new pastures, it is a major driver of deforestation, especially in Latin America where, for example, some 70 percent of former forests in the Amazon have been turned over to grazing.
Land and water
At the same time herds cause wide-scale land degradation, with about 20 percent of pastures considered as degraded through overgrazing, compaction and erosion. This figure is even higher in the drylands where inappropriate policies and inadequate livestock management contribute to advancing desertification.
The livestock business is among the most damaging sectors to the earthís increasingly scarce water resources, contributing among other things to water pollution, euthropication and the degeneration of coral reefs. The major polluting agents are animal wastes, antibiotics and hormones, chemicals from tanneries, fertilizers and the pesticides used to spray feed crops. Widespread overgrazing disturbs water cycles, reducing replenishment of above and below ground water resources. Significant amounts of water are withdrawn for the production of feed.
Livestock are estimated to be the main inland source of phosphorous and nitrogen contamination of the South China Sea, contributing to biodiversity loss in marine ecosystems.
Meat and dairy animals now account for about 20 percent of all terrestrial animal biomass. Livestockís presence in vast tracts of land and its demand for feed crops also contribute to biodiversity loss; 15 out of 24 important ecosystem services are assessed as in decline, with livestock identified as a culprit.
Remedies
The report, which was produced with the support of the multi-institutional Livestock, Environment and Development (LEAD) Initiative, proposes explicitly to consider these environmental costs and suggests a number of ways of remedying the situation, including:
Land degradation ñ controlling access and removing obstacles to mobility on common pastures. Use of soil conservation methods and silvopastoralism, together with controlled livestock exclusion from sensitive areas; payment schemes for environmental services in livestock-based land use to help reduce and reverse land degradation.
Atmosphere and climate ñ increasing the efficiency of livestock production and feed crop agriculture. Improving animalsí diets to reduce enteric fermentation and consequent methane emissions, and setting up biogas plant initiatives to recycle manure.
Water ñ improving the efficiency of irrigation systems. Introducing full-cost pricing for water together with taxes to discourage large-scale livestock concentration close to cities.
These and related questions are the focus of discussions between FAO and its partners meeting to chart the way forward for livestock production at global consultations in Bangkok this week. These discussions also include the substantial public health risks related to the rapid livestock sector growth as, increasingly, animal diseases also affect humans; rapid livestock sector growth can also lead to the exclusion of smallholders from growing markets.
Livestock’s Long Shadow
Environmental Issues and OptionsThis report aims to assess the full impact of the livestock sector on environmental problems, along with potential technical and policy approaches to mitigation. The assessment is based on the most recent and complete data available, taking into account direct impacts, along with the impacts of feed crop agriculture required for livestock production. The livestock sector emerges as one of the top two or three most significant contributors to the most serious environmental problems, at every scale from local to global. The findings of this report suggest that it should be a major policy focus when dealing with problems of land degradation, climate change and air pollution, water shortage and water pollution, and loss of biodiversity.
Livestock’s contribution to environmental problems is on a massive scale and its potential contribution to their solution is equally large. The impact is so significant that it needs to be addressed with urgency. Major reductions in impact could be achieved at reasonable cost.
Download the .pdf report here.
Livestock impacts on the environment
The challenge is to reconcile two demands: for animal food products and environmental services…
A new report from FAO says livestock production contributes to the world’s most pressing environmental problems, including global warming, land degradation, air and water pollution, and loss of biodiversity. However, the report says, the livestock sector’s potential contribution to solving environmental problems is equally large, and major improvements could be achieved at reasonable cost….
Click here to read “Andrew Tyler: Don’t follow the herd and give a cow for Christmas”, from The Independent (11/27/06)
On a related topic to the FOA article above, this picture links to a 3 year old(!) article about the ‘Flatulence Tax’ in New Zealand.
Added 10/13/07: See http://www.episcopalcafe.com/daily/ethics/climate_change_hunger_and_anim.php
Tags: Lent