New Report Gives The Lay Of The Land On Grazing Livestock’s Climate Impact

Generated Summary

This report, titled “Grazed and Confused? Ruminating on cattle, grazing systems, methane, nitrous oxide, the soil carbon sequestration question – and what it all means for greenhouse gas emissions,” is the result of an international research collaboration. It examines the impact of grass-fed animals on climate change, focusing on the debate around livestock farming and meat and dairy consumption. The study evaluates claims and counterclaims against the best available science to provide an authoritative answer regarding whether grass-fed beef is beneficial or detrimental to the climate. The research team included experts from the Food Climate Research Network at the University of Oxford, the CSIRO, and other international institutions. The report published just before the COP23 meeting in Bonn aims to address knowledge gaps about emissions and sequestration and offer a more nuanced perspective. The target audience is policy makers, the food industry, civil society, and anyone interested in the future of land use, climate change, and the role of livestock in a sustainable food future. The study emphasizes the necessity of considering animal production and meat consumption to reach the 2-degree warming limit. The research acknowledges the complexity of sustainability and focuses specifically on the climate question within the broader context of land use and environmental sustainability.

Key Findings & Statistics

• The livestock sector is responsible for 14.5% of global human-related GHG emissions.
• Ruminants (in both grazing and other production systems) contribute 80% of total livestock emissions.
• Grazing management could potentially offset between 20-60% of annual average emissions from the grass-fed only sector, 4-11% of total livestock emissions and between 0.6 and 1.6% of total annual human made emissions.
• Rising animal production and consumption – of all kinds and in all systems – risks driving damaging changes in land use and associated GHG release.
• Grazing livestock produce only a fraction of global protein supply: Spread out across the globe, 1 g of protein/person/day comes from solely grass-fed animals, as compared to 32 g/person/day coming from all animal sources (Including fish), and 49 g/person/day from plant sources.
• When it comes to land use, however, ruminants collectively use about a 1/4 of the earth’s useable surface.
• Looking at the maximum allowable emissions space from all sources in 2050, consistent with the 2-degree target laid out in the Paris Climate Agreement, it is clear that with unaltered demand projections for animal products, 1/3 of the total ‘allowable’ emissions space will be taken up by livestock.

Other Important Findings

• The study concludes that grass-fed livestock are not a climate solution and that grazing livestock are net contributors to the climate problem, as are all livestock.
• The report found that while grazing of grass-fed animals can boost the sequestration of carbon in some locally specific circumstances, that effect is time-limited, reversible, and at the global level, substantially outweighed by the greenhouse gas emissions they generate.
• Grazing livestock have a beneficial role to play in some contexts, and better management of grazing is a worthwhile objective, when it comes to climate mitigation, its potential contribution is minor.
• Even if exaggerated claims about carbon sequestration were true, it is simply not possible to carry on eating as much meat and dairy as trends indicate and obtain it through grass-fed systems alone (even with the additional feeding of agricultural by-products and food waste) – without incurring devastating land use change.
• Increasing grass-fed ruminant numbers is therefore a self-defeating climate strategy, as any sequestration is offset by emissions.
• Rapidly growing increases in primarily intensively produced pork, poultry meat and eggs, together with intensively produced beef and milk, is driving demand for new cropland to grow feed crops.
• Intensive animal production systems are associated with other concerns, such antibiotic resistance and animal welfare, not explored in this report.

Limitations Noted in the Document

• The study acknowledges that grazing livestock can boost carbon sequestration in some specific circumstances, but this effect is time-limited and reversible.
• The research focuses solely on the climate question, recognizing that sustainability has multiple dimensions, including people’s livelihoods, animal welfare, and biodiversity, which are not comprehensively addressed in this report.
• The study’s analysis of sequestration potential is based on assumptions, and the actual impact could vary depending on specific grazing management practices and environmental conditions.
• The report’s conclusion is based on current consumption levels and a 2-degree warming limit, which is subject to potential changes in demand and global climate goals.
• The study does not explore all the dimensions of sustainability, such as the impacts on people’s livelihoods, animal welfare, biodiversity, nutrition and food security.

Conclusion

The report’s primary conclusion is that grass-fed livestock are not a climate solution, as their contribution to greenhouse gas emissions outweighs any potential benefits from carbon sequestration. Rising animal production and consumption of all types, including grass-fed, exacerbate climate problems by contributing to emissions and changes in land use. The study emphasizes that simply switching to grass-fed beef is not a solution if high-consuming individuals and countries maintain their current consumption levels. The researchers suggest a more comprehensive approach that includes a focus on reducing meat consumption and considering the overall impact of animal production on the environment. The study underscores the need to consider the net balance of all emissions and removals when assessing the impact of grazing livestock on climate change. While better grazing management is a worthy objective, its contribution to mitigating climate change is minor. The report suggests that when considering different livestock production systems, various factors should be considered: people’s livelihoods, animal welfare, biodiversity, nutrition, and food security. However, when climate change is the issue, one shouldn’t assume that grass-fed steak is a climate change-free choice. The report’s findings highlight that there is a need to halt the degradation and conversion of grasslands to croplands to avoid losing the significant carbon stocks already stored in grasslands worldwide.