Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology
(FASEB)
Trying to reduce your carbon footprint? You may want to take a closer look at the protein you put on your plate.
While the pollution generated to produce a typical 8-ounce steak
is equivalent to driving a small car for about 29 miles, replacing that steak
with the same weight of a vegetarian meat substitute is like driving the same
car just three miles.
Across the board, meatless alternatives are associated
with substantially lower emissions than actual meat, according to an analysis
of the environmental impacts of 39 meat substitutes presented at the American
Society for Nutrition Annual Meeting during Experimental Biology 2016.
"As the world population grows, there's an urgent need to produce protein-rich foods that are friendlier for the environment and healthy for people," said Alfredo Mejia, Dr.PH., an associate professor of nutrition at Andrews University and the study's lead author.
"Our research shows
that consumers can continue to enjoy meat-like tastes and textures while also
significantly reducing their carbon footprint."
While many studies have drawn attention to the environmental
impacts of producing beef, pork and chicken, less has been known about the
impacts of "imitation meats" such as veggie burgers, meatless bacon
and imitation chicken nuggets, the production of which typically involves heavy
processing.
The study found that producing these foods generates
approximately 10 times less greenhouse gas emissions than producing comparable
beef-based products.
While some protein-rich meat substitutes like tofu have been
produced for centuries, the variety and popularity of meat substitutes has
exploded in recent years. Most such products today are derived from either soy
or wheat, though ingredients such as quinoa and pea are becoming more common.
"People increasingly want foods that are healthy for them
but also are sustainable for the environment," said Mejia. "This is
the rationale that is driving an emerging market for meat substitutes. We have
the power to use our fork to take care of our health and our planet."
The research team analyzed emissions generated to produce 39
common meat substitutes from the field to the grocery-ready factory output.
They began with established data on the environmental impacts of farming wheat
and soy, which includes inputs such as fertilizer, pesticides and water, as
well as energy used for cultivation, harvesting and transportation.
They then
visited factories and worked with meat substitute producers to track emissions
associated with each step of the food production process, including the amount
and origin of ingredients and packaging materials, transport of raw materials,
water, energy and other inputs required to operate the factory and pack the
products.
Crunching thousands of data points using a specialized software
called SimaPro, the team calculated total greenhouse gas emissions in terms of
carbon dioxide equivalents, a standard measure for emissions that accounts for
carbon dioxide as well as other heat-trapping gases, such as methane and
nitrous oxide.
The average impact across all types of meat substitutes was 2.4
kilograms of CO2 equivalent per kilogram of product. Comparable
stages of production in the meat industry are estimated to generate between
9-129, 4-11, and 2-6 kilograms of CO2 equivalent per kilogram
of product for beef, pork and chicken, respectively.
Among meat substitutes,
mince, nuggets, slices, rolls and sausages were associated with the lowest
emissions, while veggie burgers were associated with the highest emissions, at
4.1 kilograms of CO2 equivalent per kilogram of product.
Worldwide, agriculture accounts for at least a fifth of total
humanmade greenhouse gas emissions. Mounting pressure to stem emissions has led
to increasing calls to consider environmental impact, in addition to health,
when making food choices.
