The traditional meat production industry has a significant impact on global greenhouse gas (GHG) production worldwide. The meat industry produces about 60% of all human-based greenhouse gas emissions from the food system and uses about 40% of all crop land (Van Zanten et al. 2018). Additionally, meat production also contributes to acidification, loss of biodiversity and overuse of freshwater reserves among other things. GHG emissions in meat production are produced for the most part in the following four (4) areas: (1) production of feed, (2) enteric fermentation from feed digestion by animals (mainly ruminants), (3) manure handling and (4) energy use in animal houses (Steinfeld et al., 2006). Meat production is also very energy intensive. This is measured with Feed Conversion Ratio (FCR). As explained by Smil (2001) it is calculated as the energy, protein or mass input in feed divided by the corresponding meat output. Chicken and pigs have a lower FCR (3-6) in comparison to cattle (14-20). Meaning that much less energy is lost in the meat production process of these smaller animals when compared to beef cattle and similar animals.

Proposed alternatives

Many alternatives to traditional meat production and meat consumption have been proposed over the years as the significant environmental impacts of meat production have been increasingly highlighted. These alternatives try to address the issue from different directions. Veganism seeks to address the issue by eliminating the need for meat production entirely. If no meat is consumed, then there is no need for production. Other approaches don’t attempt to eliminate meat consumption but try to make the productions more sustainable. In-Vitro Meat and insect-based Protein solutions attempt to make the carbon footprint (CF) of meat production smaller.

In-vitro meat, a viable solution?

The proponents of this new idea are lauding it as a technological, more ecological solution for meat production. Currently there are no commercial in-vitro meat production facilities. This makes projections of the environmental impact of this new meat production method imprecise because of the assumptions that must be made. The studies that have been done, suggest that the in-vitro meat will be more ecological in all aspects than beef meat production, but not less than chicken or pork productions (Tuomisto and Teixeira de Mattos, 2011). In addition to the ecological aspects, in-vitro meat production promises to be more ethical with respect to the treatment of animals. However, there are some issues with this proposed solution. As no commercially viable production plants exist, it is yet uncertain when and how the in-vitro meat production can be ramped up and made commercially competitive. Because of the lack of blood flow, muscle tissue can only grow to about 0.5mm without a support structure that doubles as a nutrient source (Bhat et al. 2015). These structures need to be developed to form any types of recognizable meat beyond highly processes meat products like sausage or chicken nuggets.

Insect-based protein as livestock feed or for human consumption

Another much touted solution is the use of insect protein to reduce the carbon footprint of meat consumption. There are two alternative suggested uses of insect protein. One argument is to use insect protein as a replacement for soy-based protein in animal feed, as the large land and water usage of soybean production for animal feed is considered one of the largest contributing factors to their environmental impact due to it’s land use (Fearnside 2001; Barona et al., 2010; Salomone et al., 2017). The other suggestion is to use insect protein as replacement to meat for direct human consumption. When considering the GHG emissions of these methods when compared to chicken meat production, it reveals that chickens fed with insect have global warming points (GWP) rated only slightly lower than chicken fed with soybean meal (Vauterin et al., 2021). When insects are produced for human consumption the GWP rating is less than a sixth of the chicken production (Vauterin et al., 2021). There are still some hurdles for significant insect protein production either for animal feed or for human consumption. The hurdles are mostly in ramping up production on an industrial scale as well as legislation in western countries, that will allow for human consumption on a larger scale.

Conclusions

It is unrealistic that humans will voluntarily move to completely meat-free diet of their own volition. Veganism, though laudable, will not be an option for most people in the near to mid term. Other options for reducing the carbon footprint of meat consumption are needed. If these or other suggested measures will be the ones to establish themselves in the coming years, will be interesting to observe as we work on moving to a more sustainable future.

References