In our last few post, we explored how producing dairy, pork and even vegetables can produce large amount of water and air pollution. These pollutants then have a variety of impacts on human health and other organisms. How can we help to solve this problem?
Well, we can start by consuming lesser meat and more vegetables. We can even be more conscious about our choice of Meat. A single serving of Beef emits roughly 330g CO2-eq while chicken emits only 52 g CO2-eq and vegetables around 14 g CO2-eq (Vox, 2017).
By selecting cleaner meats like Chicken, we are contributing to a much smaller pollution footprint. Alternatively, if we are willing to try plant-based meat, which produces drastically lesser pollution and have a much smaller impact on our environment.
Find out more about a less pollutive diet by watching this video by Vox. What other tips do you have for having a more sustainable diet? Do you agree with the suggestions provided by the video?
References:
Vox (2017). The diet that helps fight climate change. Retrieved on Feburary 23, 2022 from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUnJQWO4YJY&t=94s
Featured Image from https://unsplash.com/photos/jUPOXXRNdcA
Milk, a relatively inexpensive, calcium-rich and protein-laden super beverage that many of us love and enjoy. In Singapore, a litre of milk will set us back around $3 but can last for 2-3 days. While Milk is relatively affordable to consumers, the pollution generated from dairying is far from affordable. In today’s blog post, we will examine the pollution and environmental impacts arising from producing milk.
Over the last 3 decades, global Milk production has increased by 59%, from 530 million tonnes in 1988 to 843 million tonnes in 2018 (FAO, 2022). This rapid increase in production has also increased the land, water and air pollution associated with dairying.
Firstly, industrial-scale rearing of Cows for milk produces a large amount of faeces and manure. Furthermore, each dairy cow is estimated to excrete faecal bacteria equivalent to 14 people ( Foot, Joy & Death, 2015). This toxic waste will then seep into groundwater or be washed into nearby water bodies, causing water contamination, excess nutrients and sedimentation (Foote, Joy & Death, 2015). Humans who consumed this contaminated water will suffer from waterborne gastrointestinal diseases and livestock will have affected the growth and mortality.
Next, the fertilisers used in the grazing fields and cattle urine produces a large amount of Nitrogen. According to a study in New Zealand, nitrogen leaching from dairy land is triple of agricultural land, at an estimated average of 28kg N/ha/year (Foote, Joy & Death, 2015). This results in nitrogen being introduced to water bodies and groundwater, which can lead to certain types of cancers and methemoglobinemia (blood disease) when consumed (Foote, Joy & Death, 2015). Furthermore, excess levels of nitrogen can cause algae blooms and over-growth of aquatic weeds, resulting in eutrophication (Foote, Joy & Death, 2015)
Apart from water pollution, Dairy produces large quantities of air pollution. The dairy industry alone produces a quarter of New Zealand’s Greenhouse Gase pollution (Foote, Joy & Death, 2015). Methane is produced by the digestive process of ruminant animals (e.g. Cows) and animal waste while Nitrous oxide is produced from dung, urine and fertilisers used.
Hope you have enjoyed today’s post and learned something. The next time you purchase a cartoon of milk, just remember that it isn’t as cheap or “green” as the packaging might suggest.
References:
FAO. (2022). Milk Production. Retrieved on Feburary 23, 2022 from https://www.fao.org/dairy-production-products/production/en/#:~:text=In%20the%20last%20three%20decades,%2C%20China%2C%20Pakistan%20and%20Brazil.
Foote, K. J., Joy, M. K., & Death, R. G. (2015). New zealand dairy farming: Milking our environment for all its worth. Environmental Management (New York), 56(3), 709-720. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-015-0517-x
Featured image from https://unsplash.com/photos/N_vt0wo7OGU
The rearing of livestock for meat is extremely pollutive, accounting for 30% of global greenhouse gases (Smetana et al., 2015). Furthermore, industrial farming produces vast quantities of animal manure that can pollute water sources and the ground. In previous posts, we explored how plant-based meats and lab-grown meat are significantly less pollutive as compared to livestock farming. Hence, alternative protein sources are increasingly seen as a potential solution to livestock rearing, a major contributor to the global pollution problem.
A more controversial source of “clean” protein comes from insects. Insects as a protein source have multiple advantages, being extremely rich in protein (more than 50% protein in dry weight) while having high reproduction rates, high feed to yield rates and low environmental impact (Caparros Megido et al., 2016).
Based on a life cycle analysis study, a gram of edible protein from insects produces 32-167% lesser Greenhouse Gas emissions as compared to Broiler Chicken and 6-13 times lesser than Beef (Huis & Ooniex, 2017). Furthermore, rearing insects requires 8-14 times lesser land and 5 times lesser water compared to Cattle (Huis & Ooniex, 2017). This represents a drastic reduction in pollution caused by the clearing of land and water pollution.
Check out the informative video below on consuming insects by The Economist.
However, would you be willing to start eating mealworms or crickets for the environment and to reduce pollution? The taste and appearance of insects will likely remain a massive obstacle towards adopting insects as an alternative protein source.
To overcome this challenge, various companies have started mixing finely grounded insects with other ingredients to create appealing looking patties. Since 2015, Bugfoundation has been selling insect-based patty (grounded buffalo worms mixed with vegetarian ingredients) in Belgium, Netherlands and Germany (Damm & Moynihan, 2018). In Southeast Asia, Etno launched an insect-based burger patty in Malaysia, made with plant-based ingredients but enriched with cricket powder as a protein source (Neo, 2021).
Figure 1 : Insect-based Burger by Etno (Source: Neo,2021)
Would making “insect” based food products look and taste appealing make you more willing to adopt insects as a main source of protein? While insects have vast potential to reduce the air and land pollution associated with the farming of livestock, it still has a long way to mass adoption.
Stay tuned for more stories about the causes and solutions to pollution from food.
References:
Caparros Megido, R., Gierts, C., Blecker, C., Brostaux, Y., Haubruge, É., Alabi, T., & Francis, F. (2016). Consumer acceptance of insect-based alternative meat products in western countries. Food Quality and Preference, 52, 237-243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2016.05.004
Damm, C. & Moynihan Q. (2018). Two German guys figured out how to get people to Eat insect Burgers. Retrieved February 18, 2022, from https://www.businessinsider.com/these-two-german-guys-got-people-to-eat-insect-burgers-2018-5
Smetana, S., Mathys, A., Knoch, A., & Heinz, V. (2015). Meat alternatives: Life cycle assessment of most known meat substitutes. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 20(9), 1254-1267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-015-0931-6\
Neo, P. (2021). Bug Burger ASPIRATIONS: Ento looks to emulate Beyond meat success with launch of first insect burger patty. Retrieved February 18, 2022, from https://www.foodnavigator-asia.com/Article/2021/01/21/Bug-burger-aspirations-Ento-looks-to-emulate-Beyond-Meat-success-with-launch-of-first-insect-burger-patty
Huis, v., Arnold, & Oonincx, D. G. A. B. (2017). The environmental sustainability of insects as food and feed. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 37(5), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-017-0452-8
Featured Image from https://www.stern.de/wirtschaft/die-hoehle-der-loewen/bugfoundation–das-steckt-im-insektenburger-aus-der-hoehle-der-loewen-8362014.html
In 2015, Singapore experienced an extreme haze event with PM2.5 levels reaching 471 (Today Online, 2015A), forcing schools and outdoor activities to be halted. In Singapore, most of us are familiar with haze given that it is almost an annual event. However, did you know that this immensely pollutive event is due to the production of food products? To be more specific, the production of palm oil.
Haze can be defined as “the existence of dry particles and smoke in the atmosphere when relative humidity is considered lower than usual (<80%) and visibility is below 10km” (Latif et al., 2018). This extreme pollution event is largely caused by slash-and-burn practices or the burning of peatland in Indonesia to provide more land for agriculture (Latif et al., 2018).
Subsequently, the smoke and particulate matter from the burning events in Indonesia are then transported over to Malaysia and Singapore by surface wind (see Figure 1). During the 2015 event, it can be seen that most parts of Malaysia have unhealthy air quality with the Air Pollutant Index (API) ranging from 100-250. The API reflects the average concentration of harmful pollutants like Sulphur dioxide, Particulate Matter <10 microns, Nitrogen dioxide, Carbon Monoxide and others.
Figure 1: Spreading of Air Pollutants from Indonesia fire to Malaysia and Singapore
(Source: Today Online, 2015B)
Apart from causing discomforts and inconveniences, haze has serious impacts on human health. The particulate matter in Haze is found to contribute to mortality and respiratory illness as the fine particulates can easily enter the respiratory system through inhalation (Latif et al., 2018). A study by Harvard University found that the Indonesia 2015 Haze crisis have been estimated to cause more than 100,000 premature deaths across Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore (Greenpeace, 2019).
Therefore, this blog post has made it clear that agriculture can be extremely pollutive. Even before the crop is planted, the clearing of forest or existing farmland can produce already produce a large amount of transboundary air pollution. Hence, any legitimate attempts to reduce the pollution of the agriculture industry will need to start at the land acquisition stage.
References:
Greenpeace (2019). Asean Haze 2019: The Battle of Liability. Retrieved Feburary 13,2022 from https://www.greenpeace.org/southeastasia/press/3221/asean-haze-2019-the-battle-of-liability/
Latif, M. T., Othman, M., Idris, N., Juneng, L., Abdullah, A. M., Hamzah, W. P., Khan, M. F., Nik Sulaiman, N. M., Jewaratnam, J., Aghamohammadi, N., Sahani, M., Xiang, C. J., Ahamad, F., Amil, N., Darus, M., Varkkey, H., Tangang, F., & Jaafar, A. B. (2018). Impact of regional haze towards air quality in malaysia: A review. Atmospheric Environment (1994), 177, 28-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2018.01.002
Today Online (2015A). PM2.5 levels hit 471 as haze situation worsens. Retrieved February 13, 2022 from https://www.todayonline.com/world/asia/pm25-levels-hit-471-haze-situation-worsens
Today Online (2015B). Mapping the haze in South-east Asia. Retrieved February 13, 2022 from https://www.todayonline.com/world/asia/mapping-haze-south-east-asia
Feature image from https://www.rainforest-alliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/deforestation-header_0.jpg.optimal.jpg
Welcome back to Polutive Food! Last week, we examined how rearing livestock produces large amounts of Greenhouse gases and plant-based meat is seen as a potential solution to this problem. However, some fans of real meat (from livestock) are sceptical of the taste and concerned with the artificial flavourings in plant-based meat.
If only we can have real animal meat without the pollution and ethical concerns around rearing animals.
In December 2020, Singapore gave regulatory approval to the world’s first lab-grown chicken meat (Carrington, 2020). The “meat” was created in a laboratory where no animal had to be raised and slaughtered. The meat cells were cultivated in a bioreactor and combined with plant-based ingredients to produce meat without an animal (Carrington, 2020). This technology is argued to reduce the land required and pollution generated in creating meat.
Is lab-grown meat truly less pollutive? Based on a life cycle analysis study, when compared to conventionally produced meat in Europe, cultured meat uses 99% lesser land, 82% lesser water and produces 78% lower Greenhouse gas emissions (Tuomisto & Mattos, 2011).
However, while lab-grown meat produces lesser methane as compared to cattle, it is more energy-intensive and produces more carbon dioxide (European Environment Agency, 2020). While both are greenhouse gases, methane only remains in the atmosphere for about 12 years, while carbon dioxide can remain for millennia (European Environment Agency, 2020). Hence, it is not a straightforward answer if lab-grown meat is less pollutive than conventional meat.
Even if lab-grown meat is less pollutive, it still needs to gain mass adoption and replaced livestock meat for there to be a reduction in global emissions. With no commercial-scale production, lab-grown meat is extremely expensive with the lab-grown chicken bites reportedly costing $50 per piece (BBC, 2020). Such a premium pricing meant that only the wealthy and extremely environmentally conscious people can afford the switch. This severely limits lab-grown meat as a solution to global pollution from food production.
Would you be willing to try lab-grown meat? Share with me your thoughts and opinions.
References:
BBC. (2020). Singapore approves LAB-GROWN ‘chicken’ meat. Retrieved February 08, 2022, from https://www.bbc.com/news/business-55155741
Carrington, D. (2020). No-kill, lab-grown meat to go on sale for first time. Retrieved February 08, 2022, from https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/dec/02/no-kill-lab-grown-meat-to-go-on-sale-for-first-time
European Environment Agency (2020). Artificial meat and the environment. Retrieved February 08, 2022 from https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/artificial-meat-and-the-environment/at_download/file
Tuomisto, H. L., & Teixeira de Mattos, M. J. (2011). Environmental impacts of cultured meat production. Environmental Science & Technology, 45(14), 6117-6123. doi:10.1021/es200130u
Featured Image: https://www.bbc.com/news/business-55155741
In previous articles, we have explored how the rearing of livestock and growing crops produces a large amount of pollution. However, the pollution from food goes beyond production and transportation, even leftover food is a source of pollution. From unfinished meals in restaurants, unsold foodstuff in supermarkets to unused vegetables in homes, we are all guilty of wasting food. Globally, about 1/3 of annual food production is wasted, causing serious land, water and air pollution (Guo & Yang, 2019). Worse of all, food waste is expected to increase with the total food waste generated in Asia expected to rise from 278 MT to 416 MT from 2005 to 2025 (Uçkun Kıran et al., 2015).
In a study focusing on Beijing, China, vegetables account for the highest proportion of waste, at approximately 43.16%, followed by meat at 20.59% and staple foods at 16.66% (Guo & Yang, 2019). The high levels of waste in vegetables is likely due to the shorter shelf life of vegetables and ease of overbuying (something I am guilty of personally). Perhaps, it is important for us to also reflect on what types of food we have been wasting and how we can reduce them.
So how does leftover food produce pollution? Well, wasted food will often end up in composts and landfills where the decomposition process produces greenhouse gases like methane (Uçkun Kıran et al., 2015). If wasted food is incinerated in the case of Singapore, this will also produce soot and carbon dioxide.
The extent of pollution from food was is really quite significant. In China (one of the largest food waste producers in the world), each person is estimated to wastes an average of 16 kg of food per year, which produces 40 kg of carbon dioxide emissions (Guo & Yang, 2019). In another study based in Australia, food waste represented 6% of the country’s Green House Gas (GHG) emissions (Guo & Yang, 2019).
Want to know more about the pollution from food waste and how we as individuals can reduce them? Check out the video below by Vox.
Thanks for reading this week. Stay tuned for more stories and discussions about pollutive food.
References
Guo, X., & Yang, X. (2019). The economic and environmental benefits analysis for food waste anaerobic treatment: A case study in beijing. Environmental Science and Pollution Research International, 26(10), 10374-10386. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-04454-1
Uçkun Kıran, E., Trzcinski, A. P., & Liu, Y. (2015). Platform chemical production from food wastes using a biorefinery concept: Platform chemical production from food waste. Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology (1986), 90(8), 1364-1379.
Featured Image: https://unsplash.com/photos/FFn2-TW8pxk
