Sustainable Cattle Raising and Healthy Consumption of Beef: Keys to a Better Future
1. Introduction
Animal husbandry, an industry that includes controlled cultivation, management, and production of domestic animals, is essential for providing food, fur, hides, medicines as well as assistance to labor and travel (Britannica, 2014). The cost, however, is a range of environmental impacts. For example, 18% of global greenhouse gas (e.g. carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4) emissions to the atmosphere are from the livestock industry (IPCC, 2014). Some recent estimates even argue that the livestock industry contributes over 51% of the global annual greenhouse gas emission, including 14% of CO2, 68% of global nitrous oxide (N2O), 64% of total ammonia (NH3), and 35–50% of methane emissions worldwide, into the atmosphere. (Dopelt et al. 2019; IPCC, 2014). Beef cattle is responsible for major parts of these numbers. Furthermore, the Incineration of cattle dung and carcass significantly lowers local air quality and the raising process also causes land degradation, vegetation removal, and water depletion (Lipson, 2011). These impacts are significant and show how important it is for us to mitigate the environmental impact of the livestock industry.
Since a large portion of emissions from the livestock industry is related to meat consumption, environmentalists have been advocating for a vegetable dominated diet, in which we eat 50% of vegetables and get most of our protein from plants so that we can significantly cut meat production and hence the emission (EAT-Lancet Commission, 2019). However, nutritionists also argue that red meat contains vital elements that our bodies need, and some nutrients in red meat are unattainable from plants. For example, Vitamin B12 is unattainable from plants. Iron, despite can be absorbed from plants, is absorbed much better from meat. Controversial claims about the value of eating meat make it clear that we need to examine this agricultural sector holistically and identify a sustainable path forward.
In this article, I will use cattle raising and beef consumption as an example to expand the discussion. Beef is a representative of the red meat family, known for the amount of protein it contains and its delicious taste. Based on a statistic from the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) in 2017, there are more than 720,000 beef cow-calf operations in the US, which makes beef the largest segment of US agriculture (Place, 2020). At the same time, beef production contributes over 40% of the greenhouse gas emissions associated with the raising of all livestock. This high emission intensity is largely because of the fact that beef has the lowest feed conversion ratio (FCR) among all meat, eggs, and milk products. To make one kilogram of beef, approximately 25 kilograms of feed is needed (Figure 1). In addition, beef also has the lowest energy conversion efficiency, only 1.9% of the calory input gets converted into edible beef products (Ritchie, 2017). These numbers make cattle the most unsustainable livestock to raise. In the following sections, I will focus on the sustainability of cattle raising, the nutritional benefits of beef, and how we could consume beef healthily in our diet.
2. Total beef consumption saw a surge
Although global per person consumption of meat, in general, has surged by 87% from 1961 to 2013, per person consumption of beef has surprisingly not changed much in recent decades (Ritchie, 2017). Global per person consumption per year of beef was 9.38 kg in 1961, fluctuated over the years, and was estimated to be 9.32 kg in 2013. This per-person consumption has risen to about 11 kg in the late 1970s, but two recessions in the early 1980s and early 1990s have pushed the numbers back to approximately 9 kilograms per person per year. Overall, the number has not changed dramatically (Ritchie, 2017).
On the other hand, total beef production has surged from 28.76 million tons in 1961 to 67.9 million tons in 2013 and 71.61 million tons in 2018 (Ritchie, 2017). Such increase in production can be well explained by the population growth from about 3 billion in the 1960s to approximately 7 billion in the 2010s. Compared to pork and chicken production, which increased at the same time by 400% and 1300 % respectively, growth of beef production is relatively slower, reflecting the greater expense of raising cattle: beef remains something of a “luxury” (Ritchie, 2017).
3. (Un)sustainability of beef consumption
Environmentally, beef is truly a villain. It threatens the environment mainly through air pollution, water contamination, and land conversion. Currently, there are basically two ways of cattle raising: on pasture (grass-fed) and on concentrated feeding operations (CAFO) (Lipson, 2011). However, both methods harm the environment in different ways.
3.1 Greenhouse Gas Emission:
Methane and nitrous oxide are two main greenhouse gases produced by livestock raising. Methane is a potent greenhouse gas that has 20 times more global warming potency than a similar amount of carbon dioxide. Nitrous oxide’s global warming potency is 265 times more than a similar amount of carbon dioxide. Methane is produced during the digestive process of animals. Ruminants, including cows, produce much more methane than monogastric animals like chickens or pigs (Figure 2). Nitrous Oxide is produced in the process of manure management. The emission level depends on the collection, storage, local weather, and humidity. For industrial CFOs that are popular in the US, large amounts of manure are generated and stored in open pits which emit nitrous oxide. In addition, the post-slaughter processing also produces substantial CO2 emissions due to intense energy consumption and the degradation of left-over carcass processing byproducts (Lipson, 2011).
Pasture raising is normally considered more sustainable, but in reality, grazing produces approximately 3–3.5 times more methane comparing to intense raising due to the low digestibility of the diet of grass-fed cattle. The grain-based diet of intense raising is much easier to digest thus emits less methane. However, the production of grain as feed has a large carbon footprint itself.
3.2 Water Contamination:
Water contamination is another major issue with livestock raising. Cattle produce more excreta compared to other livestock. As industrial agriculture became popular, CAFOs emerged all around the world.
Such an intensive mode of livestock significantly increases the stress on wastewater treatment. Most of the water resources consumed in the raising process, including drinking and servicing water, return to the environment in the form of liquid manure, slurry, and wastewater, along with the extensive amount of nutrients, oxygen depleting substances and pathogens and also heavy metals, drug residues, hormones, and antibiotics. Moreover, the amount of pollutants released by CAFOs well exceed the buffering capacity of surrounding ecosystems, thus polluting surface water and groundwater (Mateo-Sagasta, 2017). Among all agricultural sectors, livestock production releases the most organic matter, pathogens, and pollutants such as drug residues.
3.3 Land Conversion
Livestock raising also competes for land resources. Changing land to pastureland causes degradation of grassland, desertification, and deforestation. 10–20% of the grassland on earth is degraded due to overgrazing. For cattle specifically, grass-fed beef can consume an average of 35,000 kilocalories of vegetation per kilogram of slaughtered weight, which quickly wipes out the local vegetative cover (Lipson, 2011). Grain-fed cattle don’t directly cause vegetation loss, but the amount of grain they require greatly reduces overall food production and may ultimately lead to land clearing (often in tropical regions). Based on a statistic from the World Wildlife Fund, “25% of global land use, land-use change, and forestry emissions are driven by beef production” (WWF, 2021). This includes direct uses of land for beef production such as space used to graze cattle and burning down forests to build pastures, and indirect uses such as the farmland used for producing grains to feed the cows are also included. Clearly, pasture farming and CAFOs both require an extensive amount of land resources. Overgrazing is the major issue to solve if we want to reduce land degradation caused by livestock raising.
3.4 Nutritional Criticisms
From the nutrition perspective, beef is also controversial. The main argument is around whether red meat is bad for our bodies. Some nutrition scientists claim that red meat contains more saturated fat and increases the risk of heart disease, diabetes, and cancer. Others say that red meat is our best source for iron and vitamin B12.
4. Sustainable cattle raising
All critiques of cattle raising emphasize the urgency of addressing the sustainability of this industry. Seeking more sustainable solutions is on the top of our to-do list. Various beef production strategies to enhance the sustainability of the system have been proposed by environmental scientists. The effectiveness of these approaches needs to be measured in real scenarios, but a considerable number of suggested approaches are theoretically promising.
4.1 Strategies to reduce air pollution
One of the simplest ways to reduce carbon emissions from agriculture is to raise cattle on small local farms instead of remote large industrial farms. The short distance between food sources and customers reduces carbon emissions due to transportation. Small scale farms also have less environmental impact compared to large industrial farms since they won’t concentratedly release. However, whether or not this strategy is applicable worldwide remains an open question.
Methane emission is another significant portion of the environmental impact caused by cattle raising. Recent research by scientists at UC Davis has shed light on the path forward. By adding seaweed to the diet of cattle, methane emissions can be reduced up to 82% (Nelson, 2021). Ermias Kebreab, professor and Sesnon Endowed Chair of the Department of Animal Science and director of the World Food Center, conducted this study with his Ph.D. graduate student Breanna Roque. In the course of five months, Kebreab and Roque added small amounts of seaweed to the diet of 21 cattle and tracked their weight gain and methane emissions. The results showed that cattle that consumed approximately 80 grams of seaweed gained as much weight as cattle that were fed conventional diets while producing 82% less methane. This research could mean a lot to our future agricultural development. The alternative feed cuts methane emission, and meanwhile reduces the amount of grain for feed.
Other suggested methods to limit methane and nitrous oxide emission include selective breeding to make cattle digest food more effectively thus reducing methane emissions. Proper manure management to reduce decomposition and minimize methane and nitrous oxide emissions is also crucial.
4.2 Strategies to reduce water contamination
Water pollution from cattle raising mainly comes from antibiotics and manure. To reduce this type of water contamination, researchers have developed a series of strategies to mitigate its environmental impact. First and foremost, having fewer CAFOs would be a great contribution to solve the issue. A moderate amount of manure in dispersed farms and ranches is totally acceptable to the environment and may even be beneficial under nature’s ability to digest extra nutrients and substances. However, CAFOs produce a massive amount of manure and release them in a concentrated manner, which goes well beyond the buffering capacity of ecosystems.
Moving forward, effective and sustainable manure management is essential to improve the operation of CAFOs. Cattle manure is good fertilizer, with a low risk of over-fertilization and positive benefits for soil structure, which means instead of letting all the manure run into lakes and rivers, it should be collected and used for fertilizers (Lipson, 2011). Furthermore, adding manure may also improve soil health, which could lower the crop demand for synthetic fertilizer and hence water pollution due to reactive nitrogen losses from the fertilizer. However, when the amount of manure produced by CAFOs exceeds the local demand for fertilizer, transporting manure to distant farms involves extra carbon emissions. Therefore, a holistic nutrient management strategy is important.
In addition, effective nutrient cycling between plants, soil, and animals has been experimented with across the world to explore a path to sustainable livestock production. Polyface Farm operated by Joel Salatin has effectively demonstrated a preliminary success. Michael Pollan stated in The Omnivore’s Dilemma that “the relationship between cows and chickens on this farm takes the form of a loop rather than a line.” (212, Pollan). For example, chickens on Salatin’s Polyface Farm produce tasty eggs because they get natural nutrients from cattle manure, and cattle on Salatin’s farm don’t need antibiotics to stay healthy because chickens fertilize and sanitize the pasture for the cattle. (Figure 4) This cycle is only one example of Salatin’s farming methodologies, and it effectively minimized waste and reduced polluted run-off. On Salatin’s farm, “everything’s connected to everything else,” just like how our natural world works. Such farming strategies might end up being the most sustainable solution.
4.3 Strategies to mitigate land conversion
Pasture and ranch fields require extensive amounts of space, which is normally acquired by clearing forests, either with chain saws or fire. The burning process emits a considerable amount of carbon and harvesting wood also releases carbon. Multipurpose ranch land is a solution to the problem. As wind and solar power get more and more popular, raising cattle on wind farms or with solar panels (also known as solar grazing) has been proven effective. This way, the same land is used for two purposes, thus saving limited land resources. Such a raising method is also called Techno-Ecological Synergy (Frenay, 2020).
There is still an abundant amount of land that is unsuitable for crops or other uses, making them the perfect candidate for pastures for cows and other domestic animals. In some cases, cattle and crops can even be raised together. Grazing animals, including cows, goats, and water buffalo, can provide positive ecosystem benefits and improve plant species composition by removing biomass that could fuel fires, controlling vegetative growth, and dispersing seeds (Lipson). Cattle are just like other animals and function as positive additions to environmental stability. If farmers put cattle back into their original role in nature while raising them instead of raising them in ranches or CFOs, further landscape conversion can be minimized.
To minimize land degradation, Salatin’s Polyface farm also applies smart and effective approaches. To make sure cattle don’t just eat one portion of the pasture, Salatin manipulates shade on the pasture to move the herd around and give the pasture time to grow. This way, Salatin didn’t force the animals to reluctantly do something but controlled their behavior using their nature. Salatin's farm, from a sustainable and ethical perspective, presents a great model for future farms.
These strategies are promising, but most of them face the same issue — applying these strategies will reduce the productivity of beef worldwide. CFOs have an extensive environmental impact, but their productivity has enabled many of us to afford beef. It’s almost impossible to produce the same amount of beef at a relatively low cost with more sustainable approaches. Therefore, effort on the consumption side also needs to be made.
5. Healthy consumption of beef and its environmental benefits
Based on a report from the EAT-Lancet Commission, global red meat consumption is 288% higher than what’s considered healthy for us and for the planet. In the US, red meat consumption is 638% higher than the suggested healthy amount and milk consumption is 145% higher than the suggested amount. (Willett) Clearly, we are consuming much more red meat than we’re supposed to. Practicing a healthier diet with less red meat involved also solves the problem of low productivity of sustainable cattle raising. Consumption of beef will likely go down with consumption of red meat, which means even if the supply of beef goes down, we’ll still have sufficient beef for the new diet.
Importantly, eating less red meat is healthier. Based on statistics and calculations of the EAT-Lancet Commission, a healthier diet with a minimal amount of red meat can potentially reduce approximately 11 million annual death among adults, which represents more than 20% of all adult death per year. (Willett) This doesn’t mean red meat should be banned from a healthy diet. Red meat contains crucial elements and nutrients for our body to function, but the current per-person consumption amount is way beyond the amount needed for proper human function.
6. Conclusion
Scientists predict that there will be approximately 10 billion people on earth by 2050. Whether we can healthily and sustainably feed our population is a challenge that humanity face as a whole. Solving cattle production related issues is a crucial step on our journey. Although strategies above all have promising results if conducted properly, controversies over solutions will continue. Modern CAFOs indeed have made beef cheaper for consumers, but its external cost of environmental impacts is almost completely overlooked. If the cost of dealing with the environmental pollutions was factored into the price of a steak or hamburger patty, beef from CAFOs would likely be much more expensive than beef raised sustainably. With appropriate market and regulatory restrictions, in the long term, a sustainable livestock supply chain will even be cheaper for society as a whole. Raising beef sustainably also means that it is healthier because fewer or no antibiotics are needed to keep cattle healthy. Reduced consumption of beef combined with sustainable cattle raising techniques perfectly satisfies sustainability and a healthy diet. And there may be more opportunities for smallholders to make a living on the land, reviving rural areas that are struggling almost everywhere.
Bibliography:
Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. “Animal husbandry”. Encyclopedia Britannica, 21 May. 2014, https://www.britannica.com/science/animal-husbandry. Accessed 7 June 2021.
Dopelt, Keren et al. “Environmental Effects of the Livestock Industry: The Relationship between Knowledge, Attitudes, and Behavior among Students in Israel.” International journal of environmental research and public health vol. 16,8 1359. 16 Apr. 2019, doi:10.3390/ijerph16081359
Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment of the Australian Government. Australian Government, 21 Oct. 2020, www.agriculture.gov.au/abares/researchtopics/agricultural-outlook/meat-consumption. Accessed 14 June 2021.
Ritchie, Hannah and Roser, Max (2017) — “Meat and Dairy Production”. Published online at OurWorldInData.org. Retrieved from: ‘https://ourworldindata.org/meat-production' [Online Resource]
Place, Sara E. PhD; Myrdal Miller, Amy MS, RDN, FAND Beef Production, Nutrition Today: 9/10 2020 — Volume 55 — Issue 5 — p 227–233 doi: 10.1097/NT.0000000000000432
Sustainable Agriculture, Beef. World Wildlife Found (WWF), www.worldwildlife.org/industries/beef. Accessed 16 June 2021.
Lipson, Jacob, et al. Environmental Implications of Livestock Series: Cattle. Evans School, 2011.
Mateo-Sagasta, Javier, et al. “Water Pollution from Agriculture: A Global Review.” Review. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations,2017, www.fao.org/3/i7754e/i7754e.pdf. Accessed 23 June 2021.
Tabackman, Lia. Weblog post. Insider, 14 Nov. 2020, www.insider.com/is-red-meat-bad-for-you. Accessed 23 June 2021.
Nelson, Diane. “Feeding Cattle Seaweed Reduces Their Greenhouse Gas Emissions 82 Percent.” UC Davis, 17 Mar. 2021, www.ucdavis.edu/news/feeding-cattle-seaweed-reduces-their-greenhouse-gas-emissions-82-percent. Accessed 29 June 2021.
Pollan, Michael. The Omnivore’s Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals. Edition with a new afterword ed., New York, Penguin Books, 2016.
Willett, Walter. “Food Planet Health.” EAT-Lancet Commision, PDF ed.
Searchinger, Tim. “WRR Creating a Sustainable Food Future.” July 2019. PDF.
Frenay, Erica. “Solar Grazing: A New Income Stream for Livestock Producers.” On Pasture, 18 May 2020, www.onpasture.com/2020/05/18/solar-grazing-a-new-income-stream-for-livestock-producers/. Accessed 6 Sept. 2021.
