The Guardian's take on eco-friendly diets: Cooking animals is cooking the planet | Editorial

Ministry of the Future is a sci-fi novel in which the climate crisis is such a dire emergency that it forces humanity to change course. In the book, a catastrophic Indian heat wave in the near future kills over 20 million people. Climate activism turns into terrorism, and the author, Kim Stanley Robinson, writes about how panic induces behavior change. To rid people of their addiction to beef - responsible for 8.5% of man-made climate emissions in 2015 - mad cow disease is being cultivated by climate terrorists and injected by drones into millions of herds all over the world. the world. Cows are dying and beef, now too risky to eat, is rapidly disappearing from the menu.

Nothing so drastic was advocated by the food czar of the British government, Henry Dimbleby. He reasonably favors public messages based on persuasion rather than fear. The science is clear: foods of animal origin account for 57% of agricultural greenhouse gases compared to 29% for foods of plant origin. By cooking meat, people are cooking themselves. This explains why Mr. Dimbleby is in a hurry. Ministers, he told the Guardian, must warn the public that they must stop eating meat to save the planet.

Mr. Dimbleby estimates that a 30% reduction in meat over 10 years is needed for land to be used sustainably in England. Currently 85% of farmland in England is used as pasture for grazing animals such as cows or to grow food which is then fed to livestock. Although polls conducted for the government showed support for some meat reduction measures - such as setting targets for supermarkets - none were included in the food strategy white paper published in June. Mr. Dimbleby understands that the public will not be easily moved. Meat consumption is marketed as necessary, even though red and processed meats have been linked to cancer and heart disease. Early humans mainly ate vegetables. But eating meat has long been seen as something to aspire to – and peer pressure is making it harder to change habits.

Maybe the answer is to shame the public for acting on their gluttony. To eat within the limits of our planet, i.e. without net environmental damage, it has been estimated that we should consume no more than 98 g of red meat, 203 g of poultry and 196 g of fish per week. . However, in high-income countries like Britain, households currently consume double that. Putting your needs ahead of those of others is not only unfair but also dangerous for the planet. Fortunately, the mood changes. The rise of vegetarian and vegan diets reveals a conscious effort to reduce meat consumption.

Different diets will slowly change the industry, but may not transform fast enough food production systems. This will require governments to act – and treat eating meat like burning coal. Greener alternatives such as precision fermentation can produce animal-free eggs, milk and meat. Bill McKibben, writing on ministry of the future, noted that in the b...