It is safe to say that going green is near the top of everyone’s priority list these days. It certainly is for me. The way I see it, you can never be too prepared—especially when faced with the threat of melting polar ice caps. So I recycle, I take public transit and I walk wherever I can, hoping to minimize my carbon footprint. Many other conscientious people do the same. But little did I know that, despite all my efforts at sustainable living, I was still committing a major eco sin: I eat beef and I cannot bring myself to give it up, even for the sake of Mother Nature herself. Cows and other ruminants, like sheep and goats, are notorious among the green-minded community for producing copious amounts of methane, a greenhouse gas that traps more heat than carbon dioxide. According to the United Nations, livestock is one of the top environmental concerns and causes 18 percent of the worldwide greenhouse gas emissions. This means that your In-N-Out hamburger contributes more to global warming than all the planes and cars on the planet. The most environmentally friendly response to this information would have been to abstain from red meat altogether—but for those of us who cannot bring ourselves to completely give up steak forever, there is another option. Many environmental activists have recommended turning to grass-fed cows. Most of the beef on market today is grain-fed: the cows are fed corn and soy, and are injected with hormones to fatten them up more quickly. They are crammed onto pastures doused in pesticides and fertilizers. The growth of feedlots has led to acres upon acres of grassland and forest being razed to accommodate the grain needed to feed the cows. This contributes to the overall carbon footprint of a grain-fed cow, as the fertilizer needed to grow these crops constitutes a massive amount of fossil fuels. A grass-fed cow, on the other hand, will be raised on native grasses—eliminating the need for harmful chemicals and deforestation. Although some studies have shown that grass-fed cows produce more methane than feedlot cows, grass-fed cattle have a much lower carbon footprint overall. Grass-fed cows produce healthy spoil that keeps carbon dioxide under the ground and out of the air. Grass-fed beef is also healthier than grain-fed feedlot beef, as the former is high in omega-3 fatty acids, also found in salmon, and low in saturated fat. Yes, grass-fed beef can be hard to find, though “green” markets such as Trader Joe’s do stock it, and it is often more expensive than grain-fed beef. But in the long run, paying extra for the meat pays off. You get a healthier body and a healthier environment—and what could be better than that? It is safe to say that going green is near the top of everyone’s priority list these days. It certainly is for me. The way I see it, you can never be too prepared—especially when faced with the threat of melting polar ice caps. So I recycle, I take public transit and I walk wherever I can, hoping to minimize my carbon footprint. Many other conscientious people do the same. But little did I know that, despite all my efforts at sustainable living, I was still committing a major eco sin:I eat beef and I cannot bring myself to give it up, even for the sake of Mother Nature herself.Cows and other ruminants, like sheep and goats, are notorious among the green-minded community for producing copious amounts of methane, a greenhouse gas that traps more heat than carbon dioxide. According to the United Nations, livestock is one of the top environmental concerns and causes 18 percent of the worldwide greenhouse gas emissions. This means that your In-N-Out hamburger contributes more to global warming than all the planes and cars on the planet.The most environmentally friendly response to this information would have been to abstain from red meat altogether—but for those of us who cannot bring ourselves to completely give up steak forever, there is another option. Many environmental activists have recommended turning to grass-fed cows.Most of the beef on market today is grain-fed: the cows are fed corn and soy, and are injected with hormones to fatten them up more quickly. They are crammed onto pastures doused in pesticides and fertilizers. The growth of feedlots has led to acres upon acres of grassland and forest being razed to accommodate the grain needed to feed the cows. This contributes to the overall carbon footprint of a grain-fed cow, as the fertilizer needed to grow these crops constitutes a massive amount of fossil fuels.A grass-fed cow, on the other hand, will be raised on native grasses—eliminating the need for harmful chemicals and deforestation. Although some studies have shown that grass-fed cows produce more methane than feedlot cows, grass-fed cattle have a much lower carbon footprint overall. Grass-fed cows produce healthy spoil that keeps carbon dioxide under the ground and out of the air. Grass-fed beef is also healthier than grain-fed feedlot beef, as the former is high in omega-3 fatty acids, also found in salmon, and low in saturated fat.Yes, grass-fed beef can be hard to find, though “green” markets such as Trader Joe’s do stock it, and it is often more expensive than grain-fed beef. But in the long run, paying extra for the meat pays off. You get a healthier body and a healthier environment—and what could be better than that?
By Tina Karimi
Staff writer
Popularity: 4% [?]
