How does animal husbandry benefit the environment and what is its actual contribution to greenhouse gases? The importance of a balanced diet and best practices for more friendly breeding and cultivation

Animal husbandry and the meat industry are often blamed for their impact on the environment, and more specifically on increasing greenhouse gas emissions.

Indeed, industries worldwide need to make significant changes, but here in the EU – and Greece – we have adopted some of the most environmentally friendly and sustainable methods in the world.

Therefore, accusations against the meat industry, without taking into account the local characteristics, are an injustice against the efforts of our breeders and workers in the meat industry.

WHAT IS THE ACTUAL DATA?

In the EU, agropastoralism is responsible for around 9.5% of greenhouse gases, a percentage that is declining every year. Of this percentage, only 1/3 to 1/2 (depending on the country) comes from livestock. These rates are among the best in the world.

To this, we must add that most of the agricultural land in the EU is used for livestock, and most of this land would go out of food production if the animals did not graze it.

In addition, the fact that much of the EU’s livestock is managed on pasture results in carbon sequestration in the soil.

On the positive side, we must also add the extensive substitution of fossil fuels through the use of biogas from animal manure and crop residues for animal feed.

However, the effort of breeders and the meat industry in Greece and the EU for more environmentally friendly practices continues with further measures. The use of renewable energy sources (solar panels and wind turbines), modernization and upgrading of machinery and the adoption of innovative agricultural practices are some of them.

WOULD THE ENVIRONMENT BENEFIT FROM ABANDONING ANIMAL HASBUNDRY?

Absolutely not. Some areas are ideal for livestock development. Areas with unsuitable land for other crops will simply be removed from food production if not used by breeders. In this case, how could EU countries provide safe and affordable food to consumers? Would we just import them from elsewhere? And wouldn’t their production elsewhere have caused the same, if not more, increase in greenhouse gases?

The solution is not to abandon animal husbandry but to adopt even more ambitious goals for the protection of the environment and apply best practices of breeding, welfare, processing, distribution and safety.

Animal husbandry plays an important role in the economy, health and the fight against malnutrition worldwide. A balanced diet can be achieved through the use of animal products, and thus the goal of “zero hunger” on the planet can also be achieved.

Of course, we have to take the environmental crisis seriously and possibly partially revise our eating habits. But the main question we have to ask is not whether we should eat meat or not, but where it is produced and with what environmental and animal welfare standards.

The same questions should be asked about meat alternatives, and consider the local and wider effects of the production and consumption of these foods. Only by comparatively examining the effects of the various sectors can we have a serious discussion that will lead us to a more balanced diet and more friendly breeding and cultivation.