The Bite Blog


Veggie Hugger or Meat Lover?

Topics:
Blog, Meat Industry, Organic Food & Farming

Thursday, July 22nd, 2010, 4:27 PM

Weighing in here on the Mother Jones debate about meat vs. vegetarianism.

I found the other “experts” posts interesting and the commentary sharp. Was surprised to read Joel Salatin say this, though:

5. All of the negatives associated with meat, dairy, and poultry consumption stem from non-pastured production models and/or monospeciation. This includes both nutritional problems (i.e. colon cancer from red meat) to environmental considerations (i.e. irrigation water required to grow grain). This also includes humane farming considerations. In addition, far more herbivores (bison) existed in the Americas 600 years ago than exist today: The notion that methane from burping herbivores causes climate change is both unscientific and ridiculous.

Take a look at the rebuttal over at the Center for a Livable Future.

Comments (0)

For the Fearless Reader: The CAFO Reader is Here

Topics:
Blog, Meat Industry

Thursday, June 10th, 2010, 11:00 AM

Everything you ever wanted to know about animal factory farms but were afraid to ask, The CAFO Reader: The Tragedy of Industrial Animal Factories is here.

The dozens of contributors read like a who’s who of the sustainable food movement, among them ranchers, journalists, public health advocates, and more. Among them:

Wendell Berry ways in on “Renewing Husbandry: The Mechanization of Agriculture is Fast Coming to an End”

Robert F. Kennedy pens a chapter called “Farms to Factories: Pillaging the Commons”

Grist’s Tom Philpott writes “Squeezed to the Last Drop: The Loss of Family Farms”

And I contributed a chapter on the link between livestock and the climate crisis.

But it’s not all doom-and-gloom, contributors were also asked to share a vision for the future and in “Putting the CAFO Out to Pasture” you learn about how we might work toward a humane, equitable, and sustainable food system. Imagine that.

A coffee-table book format volume, including full-color photos of The CAFO Reader will be out this fall. (Just don’t serve feedlot burgers to your guests while you’ve got this one lying around).

Comment (1)

Singing the Sweet Tune of a CAFO?

Topics:
Blog, Meat Industry

Tuesday, June 8th, 2010, 12:40 PM

What do you think… A blogger is paid by the Pork Board — the marketing arm of the pork industry — to blog about pork.

Any conflict of interest there, you think?

Maybe a little?

The bloggers in question, who write the pork, knife and spoon blog, say that their funding doesn’t change their editorial line. They just love pork. It’s that simple.

But my eyebrows got a little more of a raise when the bloggers visited a CAFO hog farm – hand-picked by the industry, mind you – and waxed poetic about how lovely it was.

Read below for my comment, which should be posted to the site, too:

“I’ve long heard the line from the pork industry – which funds your site and set up your visit – that hogs appreciate being separated from their young, lest they roll over on ‘em.

I’m not so sure. As Bonnie Powell notes, hogs are at least as social as dogs and I’ve visited plenty of sustainable hog farms where families of pigs were co-existing happily – no mom’s killing their babies. But that kind of operation requires a different scale of production, one that’s not possible in the CAFO model.

What’s missing from your description of this one particular CAFO is not only a critical eye to these inhumane conditions, among others, but to the broader environmental and social context of these operations.

Sadly, we have reams of evidence that hog CAFOs are energy-intensive, polluting factories that have led to illness and death for workers as well as community members who must live near them. The industry has also been repeatedly found in violation of environmental regs. In 1997 alone, Smithfield, the nation’s largest hog producer, was fined $12.6 million for knowingly violating the Clean Air Act. Livestock production, including hog CAFOs, are now such a worrisome player in the global climate change that the United Nations Environment Program has advocated for reducing the production of meat and dairy in CAFOs.”

Want to hear a different story about CAFOs? Check out this documentary by UK journalist Tracy Worcester and read The CAFO Reader.

Or, maybe you just need the visual reminder.

How about this

Versus this

Comments (4)

Living Through My First Live Chat

Topics:
Blog, Forests, Local Food, Meat Industry, Organic Food & Farming

Tuesday, May 11th, 2010, 3:46 PM

I certainly appreciated my middle school typing classes (yes, that would be typing on a typewriter) today on Grist’s live chat. As questions came pouring in — all really smart, tough, challenging ones — I wanted to get to them all and felt in a race with the 60-minute countdown.

Thanks for all who joined. You can check it out here.

Comments (0)

Eat less meat, help the climate?

Topics:
Blog, Food Policy & Politics, Meat Industry

Friday, April 23rd, 2010, 10:40 AM

The research says yes.

A new report concludes that reduced-meat menus in hospital food service led to reduced greenhouse gas emissions and substantial cost savings.

“One of the most compelling aspects of this evaluation is the greenhouse gas emissions reductions,” says co-author of the report, Roni Neff, PhD, MS, Research and Policy Director at the Center for a Livable Future and a faculty member at the Bloomberg School of Public Health. “If the four included hospitals continued what they were doing for a year, they would collectively cut over 1,000 tons of carbon dioxide-equivalent greenhouse gas emissions from meat purchases. That’s like saving over 100,000 gallons of gasoline or growing over 23,000 trees for 10 years.”

Health Care Without Harm and the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future, part of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, released the report this week. “Balanced Menus: A Pilot Evaluation of Implementation in Four San Francisco Bay Area Hospitals,” is the first US examination of the impact that reduced-meat menus in hospital food service have on climate change.

- posted by Kate

Comments (0)

Bon Appetit Serves Cheeseburgers While Lowering Carbon Footprint

Topics:
Blog, Meat Industry

Wednesday, April 22nd, 2009, 12:38 PM

The folks over at Bon Appetit Management Co., a California-based catering company that serves 80 million meals a year at schools and companies across the country, recently announced that it has reduced the beef it purchases by 25 percent.

According to an article over at Meatingplace, Bon Appetit has “exceeded its carbon footprint goals for the year by reducing beef purchases by 25 percent, cheese by 10 percent, tropical fruit by 50 percent and total food waste by 20 percent.”

A representative from Bon Appetit said: “Chefs are able to offer the usual cheeseburgers to diners who want them, and still reduce the amount of beef they purchase. This reduction is a key component of the program because regardless of how far it travels, or how the animals are raised, beef and cheese come from methane-emitting ruminant animals and methane is a greenhouse gas 23 times more powerful than CO2.”

–Deepa

Comments (0)

European Union Parliament Joins the Climate Change Conversation

Topics:
Blog, Food Policy & Politics, Meat Industry

Thursday, February 26th, 2009, 2:12 PM

The European Union’s Parliament joined a growing debate when they assembled in early February: how to combat climate change and livestock emissions while ensuring adequate food supplies for their 27 member-nations.

According to an article on “The Pig Site,” the EU Parliament said “changes in behavior by consumers and the consideration of targets for reducing agricultural emissions should accompany regulations to cap industrial greenhouse gases and improve energy efficiency.” The 80-page report also reiterated the EU’s plan to cut greenhouse gas emissions 20% by 2020.

A step forward, right? Well, the assembly also took a huge leap backward when they decided to DELETE a piece of the report that demanded a cut in global meat consumption, especially in wealthy countries. Why the hesitation? Read the article and tell us what you think.

– Deepa

Comments (2)

The New Scientist Jumps into the Fray

Topics:
Blog, Meat Industry

Sunday, February 15th, 2009, 2:06 PM

Check out this new article from one of my favorite science mags, The New Scientist. Jim Giles does the math on what eating less meat could save us in terms of cold hard cash. His conclusion? Choosing to cut back on the tenderloins could “wipe $20 trillion off the cost of fighting climate change.” Read it yourself and let us know what you think!

Comment (1)

UK Hospitals to Go Veg?

Topics:
Blog, Food Industry News & Trends, Meat Industry

Monday, February 2nd, 2009, 10:00 PM

We gotta say, the pronouncement perked our ears up: British hospitals to promote cutting back on meat to help the climate?

Juliette Jowit, from the British rag The Guardian, reported on a plan to eliminate meat from hospital menus across the UK. The action would be part of a larger strategy by the National Health Service (UK) to lower carbon emissions and save money, which could then be redirected into patient care.

Check it out here.

The National Health Service was inspired by a study they conducted last year through which they discovered that their emissions alone account for approximately 3% of the country’s s total emissions. If the NHS was a country, this emissions toll would rank them the planet’s 81st worst emitter in 2004.

The NHS has proposed both long- and short-term changes, from “urging people to drink less bottled water to more phone-in surgeries by GPs to the food: The NHS is planning to limit meat and dairy on hospital menus. David Pencheon, director of NHS’s sustainable development unit, said, “We’d like higher levels of fresh food, and probably higher levels of fresh fruit and veg, and more investment in a local economy.”

Sounds good to us.

Comments (2)

America: Land of Fast Food?!

Topics:
Blog, Meat Industry

Wednesday, January 14th, 2009, 5:05 PM

Meredith Niles wrote a great article for Gristmill about Burger King’s new marketing scheme, a seven-minute film called Whopper Virgins. You might have seen it earlier from the FoxNews clip of my mother debating the Burger King ad-guy about it. (see below)

The filmmakers fly to remote locations and give the locals their first taste of a Burger King burger as they discuss so-called “American culinary culture” and refer to the United States as the “land of fast food.”

Niles asks, “What is the point of this film? And what about the health and climate impacts of this type of food? I doubt that the crew took the time to tell them that if they actually ate the whole Whopper they consumed 40 grams of fat. They also probably failed to mention the greenhouse gas emissions tied to animal production (18 percent of all global greenhouse gas emissions according to the U.N.) or the other environmental pollution problems associated with mass-produced animals. And I wonder if they bothered to note that the beef they were eating was probably confined in its own feces for the better part of its life.”

Misdirected advertising concept? We thought so, too.

Comments (2)

Oprah on Prop 2 and Conscious Consumption

Topics:
Blog, Food Policy & Politics, Meat Industry

Wednesday, October 29th, 2008, 11:21 AM

We wrote a while back about Oprah’s foray into veganism, now she’s taking viewers into the heart of the livestock industry with an in-depth show on Prop 2 (the California animal welfare proposition on the ballot) and the state of livestock production.

Oprah’s show includes speakers from across the spectrum, including Wayne Pacelle (president of the Humane Society of the United States and the original sponsors of the Proposition 2 legislation) as well as Prop 2 critics. Proponents of the bill say Prop 2 would ensure more humane treatment of poultry in the state. Opponents counter that it would make production more expensive, putting farmers out of business and driving up costs.

Pacelle sums up Prop 2 this way: “This is just about basic decency,” he said. “It’s about, if animals are going to be raised for food—and that’s certainly the case in this country—then the least we can do for them is allow them to move. I mean, what’s more basic than allowing animals with legs and wings to move around?”

The average American consumes approximately 254 eggs a year. 95% of egg-laying hens are raised in caged facilities. Human decency and common sense indicate that we should care about the quality and size of these cages, to ensure a better quality of life for food-producing animals and a better quality of the food we’re consuming.

You can watch a really great online slideshow about the show and learn how to be ever-more “conscious” consumers.

Comments (0)

City of Angels Mouths Off on Meat

Topics:
Meat Industry

Thursday, September 18th, 2008, 12:41 PM

Last week the Los Angeles Times opined about Rajendra Pachauri’s statement as chairman of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that cutting meat from our diets is the most effective personal act we can take to combat climate change.

We’re glad to see the message is getting out there.

Now, for the backlash.

Comments (0)

UN Climate Change Expert Says: Eat Less Meat!

Topics:
Blog, Food Policy & Politics, Meat Industry

Wednesday, September 10th, 2008, 9:40 AM

Taking a page out of our Take a Bite out of Climate Change playbook, Dr Rajendra Pachauri, chair of the Nobel Peace Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, says tackling climate change through our diet choices is an easier adjustment to make than changing our modes of transportation, if we want to personally address global warming.

He told The Observer that we should each practice a non-meat diet at least one day a week, and then gradually reduce our meat intake over time.

(See #3 on our list Ten Ways to Take a Bite out of Climate Change.)

The UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization estimates that meat production is responsible for one fifth of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions, and that at the rate consumption is increasing we will double that production by 2050.

“In terms of immediacy of action and the feasibility of bringing about reductions in a short period of time, it clearly is the most attractive opportunity,” Pachauri told The Observer. “Give up meat for one day [a week] initially, and decrease it from there.”

Pachauri also stressed that we need to make changes in every sector the economy in relation to climate change. Diet is just a starting point.

Comments (0)

Important New Paper on China’s Rising Consumption and Production of Meat and Dairy

Topics:
Food Industry News & Trends, Food Policy & Politics, Meat Industry

Friday, August 22nd, 2008, 7:47 PM

Our friend and colleague, Mia MacDonald, has written a powerful new report on factory farming in China.

Check out the full report in English (China translation coming soon): www.brightergreen.org/files/brightergreen_china_print.pdf

Here’s Mia’s press release:

New York–based policy action tank Brighter Green’s new report, Skillful Means: The Challenges of China’s Encounter with Factory Farming, explores the emerging superpower’s “livestock revolution,” which is having serious impacts on public health, food security, and equity in China—and the world. The Beijing Summer Olympics are showcasing a resurgent nation, which only two generations after a devastating national famine is eating increasingly high on the food chain. In the past ten years, consumption of China’s most popular meat, pork, has doubled. In 2007, China raised well over half a billion pigs for meat.

Given that every fifth person in the world is Chinese, even small increases in individual meat or dairy consumption will have broad, collective environmental as well as climate impacts. Increasingly, what the Chinese eat, and how China produces its food, affects not only China, but the world, too.
“When I was a child, every person was allotted one pound of pork a month,” says Peter Li, a professor of political science at the University of Houston in Texas who grew up in Jiangxi province in southeast China says in Eating Skillfully. “We could not eat more than that. You could not get it. Now, though, more people have access to more meat and want to eat a lot of it.”

In yuan terms, meat is the second largest segment of China’s retail food market. China has also opened its doors to investments by major multinational meat and dairy producers, as well as animal feed corporations, including Tyson Foods, Smithfield, and Novus International. Western-style meat culture has gone mainstream. Fast food is a U.S. $28-billion-a-year business in China. McDonald’s, a major sponsor of the Olympics, had more than 800 restaurants in China, with at least a hundred more set to open by the time the games began. Four McDonald’s are operating in Olympic venues, including the press center and the athletes’ village.

“China is not yet a bone fida “factory farm nation” like the U.S.,” says Mia MacDonald, Brighter Green’s executive director and co-author of Skillful Means. “But the strains of its fast-growing livestock sector are becoming harder to ignore. In the U.S., a re-examination of the multiple human, environmental, economic, and ethical costs of factory farming is taking place. Such a process needs to get underway in China—before it’s too late.”

Although these realities won’t be fully obvious to the millions of people cheering on the Olympic athletes in China and across the globe, they demand attention:
• China’s livestock produce 2.7 billion tons of manure every year, nearly three and a half times the industrial solid waste level. Run-off from livestock operations have created a large “dead zone” in the South China Sea that is virtually devoid of marine life.
• In northern China, overgrazing and overfarming lead to the loss of nearly a million acres of grassland each year to desert.
• Diet-related chronic diseases now kill more Chinese than any other cause, and nearly one in four Chinese is overweight.
• More than 90 percent of some bacteria in Asia can no longer be treated effectively with “first-line” antibiotics like penicillin—due to their overuse in farmed animals.
• China can still feed itself. But this is likely to change as its meat and dairy sectors expand and intensify. The Chinese government is looking abroad, not only to international food markets but also to Africa, Latin America, and other parts of Asia for land on which to produce food for people and feed for livestock.
• In 2008, China surpassed the U.S. to become the world’s leading emitter of carbon dioxide (CO2). Per capita emissions of CO2 in China have more than doubled, from 2.1 tons of CO2 equivalent in 1990 to 5.1 tons today. Meat and dairy production have a direct relationship with global climate change: fully 18 percent of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions stem from the livestock industry.

Even though the Chinese government seems set on emulating industrialized nations’ meat and dairy culture, a small but growing number of Chinese non-governmental organizations and individuals are questioning this path. To them food quality, not quantity, is important, along with issues of sustainability and animal welfare.

Comments (0)

Ground-Breaking Lecture from Nobel Prize Winner on Diet and Climate

Topics:
Food Policy & Politics, Meat Industry, Organic Food & Farming

Tuesday, August 5th, 2008, 11:31 AM

We were so excited to learn that Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, chair of the IPCC and joint-winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, will deliver the Compassion in World Farming’s annual Peter Roberts Memorial Lecture, named after the organization’s founder, this September, in London.

In the talk, “Global Warming: The Impact of Meat Production and Consumption on Climate Change,” Pachauri will focus on industrial farming’s impact on the environment and the impact of our industrialized diet on climate.

In London in September? Get your tickets now: here.

You can read more about the impact of agriculture on climate change in CIWF’s report ‘Global Warning: Climate change and Farm Animal Welfare.’

We’ll report more in September!

Comments (0)

See Our Response to NYT’s ‘If We Are What We Eat, Then Let’s Be Kind’

Topics:
Meat Industry

Tuesday, August 5th, 2008, 11:20 AM

Check out Anna’s letter to the editor in The New York Times responding to Nicholas Kristoff’s column, ‘A Farm Boy Reflects,’ from July 31. “It’s time that our tax dollars no longer finance the inhumane conditions — for workers and animals and the climate — of factory farms,” Anna Lappé, The New York Times, August 2, 2008.

Comments (0)

MSNBC on “Guilt-Free Steak”

Topics:
Blog, Meat Industry

Monday, July 28th, 2008, 9:13 AM

Check out the take on global warming over at MSNBC central. It’s been a few years, but finally people are starting to talk about factory farming and its climate change impact!

Comments (0)

Al Gets the Meat Question

Topics:
Blog, Meat Industry

Monday, July 21st, 2008, 10:19 AM

Take a Bite friend, Jill Richardson, popped the meat question to Al Gore at the Netroots conference and got the message about meat into the national news. Wrote SF Chronicle blogger:

“Our favorite question: If meat causes more carbon emissions than cars, what should we do? Al said, “It is true that it would be healthier for us as if we consumed less meat.” How come that hasn’t been a more prominent? “I myself am a meat eater and perhaps that has something to do with it.” We’ve got to walk before we run, Al said. “None of us are perfect.”

Take a look at our Eat section to get some decrease-the-meat suggestions.

Comments (0)

Bittman Takes a Bite out of Meat

Topics:
Blog, Meat Industry

Monday, June 16th, 2008, 3:33 AM

I’ve never really had to struggle with trying to imagine how to take meat out of the center of the plate, as Times writer Mark Bittman helps readers imagine today. With a mom who wrote the infamous vegetarian bible, Diet for a Small Planet, it was normal that meat never made it to our dinner table. But for those for whom eating less meat is a perplexing idea, Bittman’s piece is super helpful.

Comments (0)

Oprah and a Climate-Friendly Diet

Topics:
Meat Industry

Monday, June 9th, 2008, 5:37 PM

Think back, way back, to the year 1996. Then, with Oprah’s empire in what was then still its early years, America’s most-loved talk-show host, after hearing about the concerns of mad-cow disease from American hamburgers, dared to utter these words: “It has just stopped me cold from eating another burger!”

Those fateful words got her into serious hot water.

The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, trade industry for the beef boys, claimed that her comments were sensational and alarmist: There have been no known outbreaks of the disease in the United States, in either cattle or humans, NCBA argued at the time.

Ultimately, Oprah won the Beef Association’s food disparagement suit, but only after having to spend gobs of cash and loads of time in a Texas court defending her freedom of speech.

So, it was interesting to see Oprah dipping her toes back into the meat debate, albeit a little more quietly. And this time around she’s got a positive spin: Oprah is in the midst of a 21-day vegan diet. (In case you’re unclear on the concept: that means, no meat). In Oprah’s case, it also means swearing off caffeine, sugar, alcohol, and gluten. Inspired by best-selling author Kelly Freston, Oprah says she embarked on this diet, in part, to examine why she’s attached to certain eating habits: She’s trying to eat with more “consciousness” and “spiritual integrity.”

“How can you say you’re trying to spiritually evolve,” she wrote on her blog, “without even a thought about what happens to the animals whose lives are sacrificed in the name of gluttony?”

Maybe over in Oprah-land, we’ll start hearing about the other ethical and spiritual aspect of this 21-day meat-free spree: that it’s a climate-friendly diet, too.

Regardless of whether she champions the climate-connection, she certainly has become a cheerleader for the chow.

“Wow, wow, wow!” Oprah gushed on her blog. “I never imagined meatless meals could be so satisfying. I had been focused on what I had to give up—sugar, gluten, alcohol, meat, chicken, fish, eggs, cheese. ‘What’s left?’ I thought. Apparently a lot. I can honestly say every meal was a surprise and a delight, beginning with breakfast—strawberry rhubarb wheat-free crepes.”

Let’s see if the second time around she gets lobbed any lawsuits for loving that rhubarb.

Comment (1)

The ABC’s of Cheeseburgers and Climate Change

Topics:
Blog, Meat Industry

Tuesday, May 27th, 2008, 11:58 AM

In case you missed it, an ABC correspondent recently took the words right out of our mouth: “You are staring into the face of one thing scientists say you can do to fight climate change,” said journalist Dan Harris as bovine B-roll filled the screen.

“Leave this cow alone and eat less beef,” Harris continued. “According to the United Nations, 18 percent of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions comes from sending beef and dairy products to your kitchen table.”

After an interview with In Defense of Food’s Michael Pollan further detailed the eco-impact of cattle, Harris added: “You don’t have to give up your cheeseburgers, but if we all reduced our meat consumption by just 20 percent, it would be as if we all switched from regular cars to hybrids. It would also be good for our health.”

Of course, not everyone was so happy with the ABC revelation.

Over at the Business & Media Institute, which works to “advance the culture of free enterprise in America,” staff writer Jeff Poor argued that Harris neglected to interview anyone from the beef industry. But what really got Poor is that Harris didn’t mention the enormous economic hit our country would face if we curbed cheeseburger consumption. Keep chomping those cheeseburgers folks, it’s a matter of national prosperity? Apparently.

Said Jeff Poor, “it’s hard to imagine the job losses and the subsequent economic impact throughout the country if Americans cut back their beef consumption by as much as 20 percent.” To bolster his bluster, Poor quotes a report from the National Cattlemen Beef Association’s Web site: “Direct and indirect employment in or related to the production and processing of beef supports over 1.4 million full-time-equivalent jobs in the U.S.,” the Cattlemen claim. “Cattle are produced in all 50 states and their economic impact contributes to nearly every county in the nation and they are a significant economic driver in rural communities.”

What Poor doesn’t mention is that those jobs, particularly in meat processing plants, are some of the most dangerous and underpaid in the country: Meat packers face injury rates twice as high as other manufacturing jobs and receive 30 percent less compensation than the average manufacturing job. In a 2005 report, Human Rights Watch issued its first criticism of a U.S. industry ever, reporting that working conditions in America’s meat packing plants were so bad that they violated basic human and worker rights.

Maybe if we shifted our economy to better agricultural jobs, producing food that’s healthier for our bodies and the planet, and paid those workers in the meat industry better wages and protected their basic security, and reduced our meat consumption, we’d not only be saving the planet, but we’d be saving lives, too.

Comments (0)

Agribusiness Profit (Updated)

Topics:
Food Industry News & Trends, Meat Industry

Tuesday, May 27th, 2008, 11:49 AM

A few weeks ago, I posted a blog about the record profits of some of the biggest agribusiness companies while newspaper headlines blared about the global food crisis. Well, this just in: Surprise…profits continue to spike.

Bunge, one of the world’s largest grain processors, recently announced its quarterly profits were up 70 percent. At the end of last month, Archer Daniels Midland, agribusiness big gun and the country’s second-largest ethanol producer, announced its third-quarter profits had increased by 42 percent.

This food industry windfall, while the poor struggle to afford the most basic food items, feels eerily similar to the record profits of the oil industry, while people scrape the bottom of their piggy banks to fill their tanks.

Comments (0)

Spies, Lies, and Burger King

Topics:
Local Food, Meat Industry

Thursday, May 15th, 2008, 9:16 AM

Eric Schlosser continues to remind us what good journalism looks like (and what good titles sound like).

In “Burger With a Side of Spies,” his recent explosive op-ed in The New York Times, Schlosser reveals Burger King’s hiring of undercover agents in a battle against the coalition working to improve wages for the farmworkers providing the fast food chain its produce.

An AP story reports today that Burger King has now fired two employees after it was disclosed that an executive was secretly posting blogs condemning the farmworker coalition.

The company also said it was going to discontinue the use of the private investigation firm Schlosser exposed. And, Burger King also said it plans to meet with the coalition to “find ways to ensure decent wages and working conditions for the region’s harvesters.” Workers-1, Burger King-0.

Makes you wonder what would have happened had Schlosser’s journalistic integrity not revealed the shenanigans of the company. (Read the op-ed and you’ll get a sense of just how creepy their secret spying was).

Comments (0)

Red Meat Gets a Knockout Punch

Topics:
Meat Industry

Wednesday, May 7th, 2008, 12:08 PM

Red meat gets another hit this month in a study published in Environmental Science & Technology: Researchers found that knocking red meat off the plate and substituting it with vegetables, fish, or chicken can seriously decrease the climate change impact of your diet.

We here at Bite Central have been singing that tune for a long time and are glad to hear the chorus echoed in impressive science magazines.

According to the study, red meat production is roughly 150 percent more greenhouse gas intensive than producing chicken or fish.

As we note elsewhere on the site, red meat production is so carbon intensive for a number of reasons, among them:
- cattle are ruminants, which means they digest food in multiple stomachs and in multiple steps: first they convert raw material into “cud,” regurgitate it to chew it and eat it again. In the process, unfortunately, in the chambers of their stomach they produce methane, which they emit mainly through their noses. (I hear people mention cow farts a lot more than cow snorts… I guess gas is always good for a laugh);
- most cattle are raised in feedlot confinement, which creates such vast amounts of excrement that it can’t naturally be cycled through an agricultural system and instead is a major pollutant, emitting greenhouse gases;
- since these factory farmed cattle are raised in feedlots (and not on pasture), they must be fed, right? The climate change costs of the production of feed are also serious: from the emissions produced in making the synthetic fertilizers and pesticides to the emissions created when using them to the emissions from powering on-farm machinery and shipping all that feed to its final destination.

While I’m pleased to see these researchers take a stand on red meat critique, I was struck that the authors set up their argument as a face-off with local foods: A dietary shift away from red meat can be a “more effective means of lowering an average household’s food-related climate footprint than ‘buying local,” they wrote.

While they’re right that red meat consumption – and lowering it! – will be a key part of dealing with the climate impacts of our diet, this doesn’t mean we have to forsake our support of local foods.

We know that emissions from food transportation are just a small slice of the food sector’s global warming pie. In this study, for instance, the authors peg the percentage of greenhouse gas emissions from food transport at 10 percent of the sector’s total emissions. This is roughly in line with other figures I’ve seen.

But by saying that food transport isn’t such a significant aspect of greenhouse gas emissions from food is missing a key point the buy local movement makes: there are a multitude of reasons for supporting local food. It isn’t just about calculating the odometer of food items for their own sake.

We know that the choice for local isn’t just about choosing food with the lower mileage, choosing local typically means choosing foods grown sustainably, which is good for the climate. Local foods also tend to be fresh foods, which means less packaging and processing– also good for the environment. And when people choose “local meat” they don’t mean the local Tyson processing plant, they mean meat that has been raised on small-scale farms, not on feedlots, which is also, you guessed it, good for the environment.

So let’s take this study’s message to heart: Eating less red meat is a key part of the climate change solution… but let’s not forget that eating local is, too.

Comments (0)

Go Green! Cut Out the Red Meat

Topics:
Meat Industry

Monday, April 28th, 2008, 2:48 PM

Reuters writer Terri Coles interviewed me for this article on the meat-climate change connection. I thought it was interesting to note the poll that came along with it. Now, who knows how many people actually submitted a response, but among those who did more than two-thirds said they’d either quit eating red meat for a month, or already eschew the stuff, to combat climate change.

Comments (0)

Who’s Hurting and Who Is Cashing in on the Spikes in Food Prices?

Topics:
Food Industry News & Trends, Hunger & Food Crisis, Meat Industry

Thursday, April 17th, 2008, 6:31 AM

A recent Financial Times had a staggering map of the globe: Black dots marked each of the countries were there have been food riots because of the rising prices of food. Thirty dots in all. And a recent CNN report noted that “Riots, instability spread as food prices skyrocket.” These surging costs, warns World Bank President Robert Zoellick, “could mean ‘seven lost years’ in the fight against worldwide poverty.”

Meanwhile, I couldn’t help but notice which agribusiness company has just reported an 86 percent jump in its quarterly earnings. Cargill, one of the world’s largest private companies said that these strong earnings have been driven mainly by its commodities division and primarily because of the booming demand for biofuels and increasing demand in new markets, especially Asia.

Last year this global company posted a net profit of $2.34 billion. (They’re total sales last year were $88.3 billion). Just to put that in some context: $2.3 billion is the GDP of Belize.

Comments (3)

“Climate Changes Your Business” Says KPMG

Topics:
Food Industry News & Trends, Meat Industry

Thursday, April 10th, 2008, 11:56 AM

KPMG’s latest report from its sustainability offices may have just won the “no-duh title of the year,” but it does take an interesting approach to the climate change question: What does climate change look like from the business side of the equation?

I’ve been asking this question a lot lately, attending food industry conferences to listen to how they frame the risk (and opportunity) that climate change provides. At that meat conference in Nashville, for instance, it was notable that global warming was on no one’s lips. At the Grocery Manufacturers Association Environmental Sustainability Summit, it was in almost everyone’s talking points.

In the KPMG report, the authors place the “food sector” in the “safe haven” section of their “perceived risks versus preparedness” matrix. (Nice job on this fancy-looking graphic. Like the color coding, guys). The top six sectors at particular risk from climate change? Aviation, healthcare, tourism, transport, oil and gas and the financial services sectors.

But the authors also make the point that even those ’safe haven’ categories like food, may not be so safe after all. Food and beverages, for instance, says one author, are “supposedly a low risk sector yet recent events have shown that this industry is highly vulnerable to climate related risks such as increases in agricultural input costs. The idea therefore that this sector is relatively safe from climate change effects is likely to reflect a significant under-estimation of risk.”

In other words, “safe” doesn’t mean much in an era of climate change.

Comments (0)