Is there possibly more to vegetarianism than ethical protests against the killing of animals? Paul McCartney has recently come out to support the idea that becoming a vegetarian may also improve the environment. After an interview with the notorious PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) Sir Paul stated, “I would urge everyone to think about taking this simple step to help our precious environment and save it for the children of the future.”
One reason the 66 year-old former Beatle claimed eating meat was bad for the environment is the amount of land and water wasted to raise, pack and preserve the meat. Reuters reports that “a 2006 United Nations report found that cattle-rearing generated more greenhouse gases than transportation” so Sir Paul’s argument has some pretty powerful legs.
The rise in demand for meat has caused problems for the industry, and has given full scale industrialized farmers more work. But this process easily allows diseases to spread as animals being raised are kept in such small vicinities. The demand for low-grade meat is also growing, as the demand for fast food continues to rise. Americans alone spend 110 billion dollars a year on fast food, more than entertainment.
The approximate 1.4 billion tons of animal waste created in factory farms every year in the U.S. pollutes waterways. And due to the demand for cheap meat, some of this waste actually gets reused. Oregon State University agriculture professor Peter Cheeke “calls factory farming “a frontal assault on the environment, with massive groundwater and air pollution problems.” Problems he’s worried about are similar to what Sir Paul was referencing in his PETA interview; loss of cropland due to grazing, inefficiencies of feeding large quantities of water and grain to cattle, and pollution from factory farms.
The Swedish government initiated a report recently released by the U.N. Commission on Sustainable Development, stating that, “our current “demand for water-intensive commodities like meat and dairy products is unsustainable. They involve large-scale groundwater overexploitation and widespread river depletion, which pose a major threat to biodiversity and aquatic ecosystems.”
The World Watch Institute reports for every 8 ounces of beef, 25,000 liters of water is needed. So many environmentalists’ arguments lie in the nonsensical idea of being a meat eater and recycling at the same time. They believe it’s a catch 22.
So is there anything stopping people from not eating meat, besides enjoyment? Certain nutritionists claim vegetarian diets lack protein, but other health experts claim a well balanced diet is easily attainable through beans, and nuts. Is vegetarianism the future of the planet? Will all meat eaters eventually be forced into submission, due to a lack of resources? The course is possible, with meat being just one out of many luxuries we may have to abandon in the coming years. One thing’s for sure, the animals would be happy.
