The one in this article sounds like a sensationalist headline, but unfortunately it is not; inside of the impact caused by the food industry , which emits 26% of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, livestock is responsible for 61% thereof. Also 79% of ocean acidification; 81% of the deforestation of forests and 95% of eutrophication, that is, the contamination of freshwater bodies.
So we know that the industry that provides us with animal food is much more polluting than the one that provides us with vegetable food , to the point where you get a kilo of animal protein is ten times more expensive and polluting to get a kilogram of vegetable protein -which can be just as nutritious as that which comes from fish, birds and mammals-.
The above percentages were obtained by the European Comission in 2015, and they are now collected by the dietitian-nutritionist and food technologist Aitor Sánchez in his new book Your diet can save the planet (Paidós, 2021). In the volume, full of equally interesting numbers -and worrying -, the author invites us to examine what changes can we make in the food we consume in our day to day to try to curb the climate crisis as much as possible.
The thing is serious: a global warming of 1.5 degrees more than during the industrial period - a limit to which we are dangerously close - would result in phenomena such as the destruction of 70 to 90% of the coral reefs present in the world. If we reach two degrees, we will have to directly say goodbye to this key element for the survival of marine ecosystems.
Planet
Your diet can save the planet
Of course, with a global pandemic still present and an economic recession looming, The last thing many of us want to do is make more sacrifices. . To recycle, avoid plastics and try not to take the plane, now we must add one more resignation: abandon animal products such as meat, milk, cheese, fish... So is it required that we become vegan to be environmentally responsible? It would be ideal, but even with smaller changes, as we will see throughout this article, we can make a big difference.
It's worth a try: after all, we risk the survival of the planet -and our own -. I mean, we risk it all. And not only because we are destroying the atmosphere that allows us to inhabit the Earth, which perhaps seems very abstract to imagine: it is that, already in 2019, there were 135 million people in acute food insecurity -with high malnutrition and excess mortality-, a much higher figure than in previous years. The reason is explained by Sánchez: "Socio-political conflicts, climate change, droughts and economic crises."
"The forecasts of achieving the goal of 'zero hunger' by 2030 are discouraging and, being realistic, we consider them directly discarded. Far from getting closer to the goal, we are moving away, "writes the dietitian in the volume of it.
"BUT I ALREADY CONSUME LOCAL AND CLOSE PRODUCTS"
You may be thinking now: "But I eat seasonal and local meat and fish." Well: according to Sánchez, at the level of emissions, it is much more important what you eat and not so much when and where you eat it , although consuming local products has many advantages apart from the global calculation of associated emissions.
For example, if we choose a breakfast of bread with local oil and ham instead of opting for industrial bakery , we will be saving everything the process of preparation, packaging and transport associated with these unhealthy products, which is also good for the environment -as well as for your body-. Only it influences much less in the total calculation.
An example? Transport accounts for only 10% of the total emissions of a food , which gives rise to paradoxes such as the result more sustainable to produce tomatoes in hot countries and then sell them to cold places thousands of kilometers away to use greenhouses in these northern countries to grow them, generating artificial heat and using a greater amount of fertilizers.
IS IT SO POLLUTING TO EAT MEAT?
Not only is it very polluting; is that, in addition, it is one of the few things in our power to mitigate global warming . According to a study by Seth Wynes and Kimberly Nicholas collected in Your diet can save the planet, the four most effective changes we could make individually to stop climate change are:
1. have one less child , which would save an impact of 58.6 tons of CO2 per year.
two. Avoid transoceanic air travel , which would mean a saving of 1.6 tons of CO2 for each return flight.
3. Opt for public transportation or non-polluting, like the bicycle. This would mean a saving of 2.4 tons of CO2 per person per year.
Four. Eat without resorting to animal products , with which we would avoid throwing 0.8 tons of CO2 per individual per year into the atmosphere.
Where, then, is recycling and not buying single-use plastics, which are the most promoted strategies to end the climate threat? According to Sánchez, these actions, although necessary, are between four and eight times less efficient if we compare them with the decision to eat a more sustainable diet every day. And since not many of us are willing to stop having children, nor can we afford to take only non-polluting transport, changing our diet may be the ultimate strategy that allows us to create a more sustainable planet.
**IF YOU STILL WANT TO CONTINUE EATING ANIMAL PRODUCTS...**
If environmental arguments can't quench your craving for a good steak, here are some tips de Sánchez to make more sustainable decisions when acquiring it:
- Don't eat suspiciously cheap animal products , since, in general, they are associated with scenarios with more animal abuse and more environmental impact. We speak, for example, of sausages, hamburgers, nuggets...
- If the quality of some eggs, cheese or meat does not stand out, it is because it is produced under animal abuse and bad practices related to a higher volume of emissions. If it doesn't say anything on the packaging of the eggs, for example, assume they are from cage-raised hens.
- Reject and do not normalize those especially cruel productions, such as the case of the foie.
- If you eat meat, unless it is from extensive and less cruel productions.
- If you eat cheese, let it be at least differentiated quality and with seal of origin.
- If you eat eggs, let them at least be free range chickens.
- If you specifically like the taste of meat, try and see what you think of 'vegetable meats'. Surely, they will surprise you, since they have better qualities and more competitive prices.
- Ask at your place of purchase about origins and breeding methods ; Only then will you begin to generate debate and transfer the pressure as a consumer.
AND WHAT ABOUT THE FISH?
Despite the fact that, in general, we eat more meat than fish, the consumption of this food has increased since the 1960s by 3% each year, going from nine kilos then to reaching 20.5 kilograms per capita per year what we eat today
We eat more fish than ever , and, furthermore, we are more people inhabiting the planet than in all of our history. It is not difficult to infer, then, that the fish are in serious danger due to our voracity, since, due to the high volume of fishing, they cannot regenerate quickly enough. **
As if that were not enough, we continue practicing the trawling, responsible for almost all the damage that has been done to the bottom of the sea. "This is because it is a fishing model that drags its net along the seabed, generating a great impact and capturing everything in its path," writes Sánchez.
"Of course, the species that were sought for commercial purposes are fished, but collaterally the ecosystem is destroyed and the life of many other species that do not have that commercial value is ended". Thus, we end up killing about 300,000 whales, dolphins, turtles, porpoises and about 100 million sharks every year -their presence has been reduced by up to 90%- so that no one consumes them.
In summary: the seas are on the brink of collapse. We are on the way to extinguishing all the species that live in them, as well as essential elements for the Earth's ecosystem, such as plankton, that produces more oxygen than all the forests and grasslands on earth combined . "We are a society that cuts the plastic rings of our cans to protect the fish, instead of stop eating the fish to protect them from ourselves," writes Sánchez.
And if that was not enough, farming fish in aquifers is also not sustainable . On the one hand, each animal has to be fed a huge amount of smaller fish to reach the ideal size for consumption - a salmon consumes five times its weight in fish -; On the other hand, this use of water from rivers, aquifers and lakes also has a negative impact on the environment: today, one third of freshwater fish is in danger of extinction , and we have also lost a third of the planet's wetlands in the last 50 years alone.
IF YOU STILL WANT TO CONTINUE EATING FISH...
You love the Russian salad, okay: here are some tips gathered in Sánchez's book so that you consume it causing the least damage to the environment.
- Do not consume endangered species.
- Avoid fish or shellfish that do not allude to their sustainability , then, in all likelihood, their exploitation will not be sustainable.
- avoid consuming fish derivatives or substitutes , such as surimi, hake sticks or the like.
- If you eat fish, let it be at least seasonal and of identified fishing areas.
- If you eat canned or canned fish, let it be with MSC or ASC sustainable fishing certifications.
- obtaining non-sentient mollusks , such as clams, mussels, cockles... is usually more sustainable and generates less animal suffering.
- Try to use seaweed in stews and different dishes. You can get a taste of the sea without the need to resort to animal products.
- Ask at your purchase establishment about the origins and methods of fishing, so you will begin to create debate and transfer pressure as a consumer.
AND WHAT ABOUT BEING A FLEXITARIAN?
"Due to the great implications of changing the model that the complete elimination of animal products from our consumption entails, there is a more plausible and pragmatic aspect which aims to reduce, and not necessarily eliminate, protein of animal origin in our diet", writes the nutritionist. "This aspect is known as the 'flexitarian diet', and is based on a vegetarian routine in the day to day that has room to be able to incorporate meat or fish sporadically".
Thus, if the average meat consumption diet emits 5.63 kilos of CO2 into the environment every day, a diet in which little meat is consumed emits 4.67 . If we decide to give up meat and eat only fish and other animal products, we would drop to 3.91, while if we ascribe to a vegetarian diet, the amount would remain at 3.81. Finally, if we bet on the vegan diet, the daily emissions would remain in 2.89 kilos of CO2.
And here's the good news: just By reducing our average meat consumption, we could reduce up to a ton of CO2 per person per year . If, for example, everyone in the UK did, that would mean reaching emissions similar to those of 1847.
On a global level, it could mean a reduction similar to that of ' roll back' industrial emissions to 1971 levels , as Sánchez explains in his manual. "It is no longer just that change is possible, it is that change, in addition to being possible, can save us as a civilization ", concludes the author in this very complete book, one of those that should be mandatory to read.
SUBSCRIBE HERE to our newsletter and receive all the news from Condé Nast Traveler #YoSoyTraveler