Eating The Planet?, is a report produced by a collaboration between Compassion In World Farming, and Friends Of The Earth, and puts forward the view that vegetarianism is not essential for feeding the rapidly expanding world population. By ditching intensive forms of industrial farming there would seem to be a good chance of producing enough food for everyone without destroying the planet. The snag for carnivores is that they should eat less meat. For a refreshing analysis of the issues see respected food writer Joanna Blythman who tells it like it is when it comes to meat and the planet Less meat, more veg
You may have already read the article by Mary Horesh on Meat Free Mondays and the other items on this site on that subject. This is now a growing debate and there is much more to be said and there are some who would prefer to blur the arguments due to vested interests. Some will say that this is all a vegan or vegetarian plot to stop us eating meat, while others will question why they should see their diet as part of the environmental debate. There is a long way to go before these opposing camps are put into the side aisles while the majority of us get some facts and figures. Some of those figures do not make pleasant reading and the statistics for beef production are no exception.
The three issues which make beef an environmental problem are water consumption, the sourcing of animal feed and methane. This means that the piece of beef on your plate is there because of combinations of several inputs which raise questions of sustainability. My personal view is that these issues are worth confronting because I not only want to maintain my dietary choices to include beef but I want to see those who produce this product locally to do so by sustainable methods while keeping our farming economy. Although many will argue that the land taken up for producing beef should be used for producing food for a vegetarian diet, there is considerable doubt as to whether the local climate would allow this.
Herefordshire Beef is a product which should be up there in the marketing bright lights as a sustainable quality product with excellent feed stuff sourcing and high welfare standards. Provenance is therefore all important as is educating the consumer in such matters. If price is the only criteria that the shopper applies then a niche product will never compete against the cheap, poor quality meat products on the market. Consumers have to be confronted with the true environmental and welfare costs such products involve. Alongside this the consumer has to be made aware that we eat too much animal protein in this country and by cutting back on meat generally, better quality meat could be bought for the days when meat is on the menu. A prestige and preferably regional market should be developed in which quality producers make sure it is their product that is purchased for the Sunday roast.
Showing posts with label Population Growth. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Population Growth. Show all posts
Wednesday, 18 November 2009
Tuesday, 1 September 2009
Population Increase: The Elephant in the Cabin
An Indian government minister has said that the question of population growth, 14 million a year in India’s case, should be left out of climate talks. See Guardian 28/8/09 http://bit.ly/4vaTjj
Why? Various reasons can be given, not least that the carbon emissions per capita are low compared with our American friends. But the trouble is that the question is being left out of much of the environmental discussion for some reason, although we all know, or should it be, because we know, with some dread, that the problem is getting worse.
A few weeks ago I threw out a book entitled ‘The Population Explosion’ which I had bought in about 1964. It was a very depressing read and showed how Malthus, who predicted the problems of population growth, had underestimated the rate at which it was taking place. I do not remember the authors name and of course I now regret getting rid of the book. I think it went to Oxfam, but whatever the dire warnings, we are all now living through the various consequences.
Great efforts are being made to produce food for the increasing world population but these efforts are at the same time threatening the sustainability of spaceship Earth. Any form of transport with too many people on board will usually come to grief, so while we are all trying to reduce our carbon emissions we are failing to slow the world’s population growth. Peoples aspirations also grow, and with them, the demands for the products of both factory and farm.
When populations in any form of life get too big nature usually finds a way of solving the problem. Starvation and disease are the most common and the human race is not going to be any different. Add to that the major shifts in population which will occur as food producing areas shrink, then Earth’s population could be crowded into the northern and southern hemispheres which we already know have finite food production potential. We are already seeing the results of rainfall and monsoon changes and how this effects populations in the Indian sub-continent and Africa. Limitation of population growth through birth control seems a more humane alternative to disease and starvation. To think that population growth can be matched by increased food production is a cruel allusion.
Given such depressing facts it is not surprising that environmental campaigners would rather not think about population growth. But, all the time we don’t talk about it the elephant in the room, or should I say, cabin, is getting bigger. There are some who will say that there is little enough encouragement to keep on campaigning and if it is that bad we might as well give up. My answer is that there is still a chance there is just enough time to get the passenger list stabilised, the catering department in order, and the cabin atmosphere of sufficient quality for the duration of the flight. Neither the crew nor the passengers know how long the journey will take. There is no bail out option, nor should there be. Why? Well, because it is surely better to spend the money on getting this spaceship in good order rather than tripping off to foul up a few more.
Dacier
Why? Various reasons can be given, not least that the carbon emissions per capita are low compared with our American friends. But the trouble is that the question is being left out of much of the environmental discussion for some reason, although we all know, or should it be, because we know, with some dread, that the problem is getting worse.
A few weeks ago I threw out a book entitled ‘The Population Explosion’ which I had bought in about 1964. It was a very depressing read and showed how Malthus, who predicted the problems of population growth, had underestimated the rate at which it was taking place. I do not remember the authors name and of course I now regret getting rid of the book. I think it went to Oxfam, but whatever the dire warnings, we are all now living through the various consequences.
Great efforts are being made to produce food for the increasing world population but these efforts are at the same time threatening the sustainability of spaceship Earth. Any form of transport with too many people on board will usually come to grief, so while we are all trying to reduce our carbon emissions we are failing to slow the world’s population growth. Peoples aspirations also grow, and with them, the demands for the products of both factory and farm.
When populations in any form of life get too big nature usually finds a way of solving the problem. Starvation and disease are the most common and the human race is not going to be any different. Add to that the major shifts in population which will occur as food producing areas shrink, then Earth’s population could be crowded into the northern and southern hemispheres which we already know have finite food production potential. We are already seeing the results of rainfall and monsoon changes and how this effects populations in the Indian sub-continent and Africa. Limitation of population growth through birth control seems a more humane alternative to disease and starvation. To think that population growth can be matched by increased food production is a cruel allusion.
Given such depressing facts it is not surprising that environmental campaigners would rather not think about population growth. But, all the time we don’t talk about it the elephant in the room, or should I say, cabin, is getting bigger. There are some who will say that there is little enough encouragement to keep on campaigning and if it is that bad we might as well give up. My answer is that there is still a chance there is just enough time to get the passenger list stabilised, the catering department in order, and the cabin atmosphere of sufficient quality for the duration of the flight. Neither the crew nor the passengers know how long the journey will take. There is no bail out option, nor should there be. Why? Well, because it is surely better to spend the money on getting this spaceship in good order rather than tripping off to foul up a few more.
Dacier
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)