UN says eat less meat to curb global warming

· Climate expert urges radical shift in diet
· Industry unfairly targeted - farmers

People should have one meat-free day a week if they want to make a personal and effective sacrifice that would help tackle climate change, the world's leading authority on global warming has told The Observer

Dr Rajendra Pachauri, chair of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which last year earned a joint share of the Nobel Peace Prize, said that people should then go on to reduce their meat consumption even further.

His comments are the most controversial advice yet provided by the panel on how individuals can help tackle global warning.

Pachauri, who was re-elected the panel's chairman for a second six-year term last week, said diet change was important because of the huge greenhouse gas emissions and other environmental problems - including habitat destruction - associated with rearing cattle and other animals. It was relatively easy to change eating habits compared to changing means of transport, he said.

The UN's Food and Agriculture Organisation has estimated that meat production accounts for nearly a fifth of global greenhouse gas emissions. These are generated during the production of animal feeds, for example, while ruminants, particularly cows, emit methane, which is 23 times more effective as a global warming agent than carbon dioxide. The agency has also warned that meat consumption is set to double by the middle of the century.

'In terms of immediacy of action and the feasibility of bringing about reductions in a short period of time, it clearly is the most attractive opportunity,' said Pachauri. 'Give up meat for one day [a week] initially, and decrease it from there,' said the Indian economist, who is a vegetarian.

However, he also stressed other changes in lifestyle would help to combat climate change. 'That's what I want to emphasise: we really have to bring about reductions in every sector of the economy.'

Pachauri can expect some vociferous responses from the food industry to his advice, though last night he was given unexpected support by Masterchef presenter and restaurateur John Torode, who is about to publish a new book, John Torode's Beef. 'I have a little bit and enjoy it,' said Torode. 'Too much for any person becomes gluttony. But there's a bigger issue here: where [the meat] comes from. If we all bought British and stopped buying imported food we'd save a huge amount of carbon emissions.'

Tomorrow, Pachauri will speak at an event hosted by animal welfare group Compassion in World Farming, which has calculated that if the average UK household halved meat consumption that would cut emissions more than if car use was cut in half.

The group has called for governments to lead campaigns to reduce meat consumption by 60 per cent by 2020. Campaigners have also pointed out the health benefits of eating less meat. The average person in the UK eats 50g of protein from meat a day, equivalent to a chicken breast and a lamb chop - a relatively low level for rich nations but 25-50 per cent more than World Heath Organisation guidelines.

Professor Robert Watson, the chief scientific adviser for the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs, who will also speak at tomorrow's event in London, said government could help educate people about the benefits of eating less meat, but it should not 'regulate'. 'Eating less meat would help, there's no question about that, but there are other things,' Watson said.

However, Chris Lamb, head of marketing for pig industry group BPEX, said the meat industry had been unfairly targeted and was working hard to find out which activities had the biggest environmental impact and reduce those. Some ideas were contradictory, he said - for example, one solution to emissions from livestock was to keep them indoors, but this would damage animal welfare. 'Climate change is a very young science and our view is there are a lot of simplistic solutions being proposed,' he said.

Last year a major report into the environmental impact of meat eating by the Food Climate Research Network at Surrey University claimed livestock generated 8 per cent of UK emissions - but eating some meat was good for the planet because some habitats benefited from grazing. It also said vegetarian diets that included lots of milk, butter and cheese would probably not noticeably reduce emissions because dairy cows are a major source of methane, a potent greenhouse gas released through flatulence.

Contributor

Juliette Jowit, environment editor

The GuardianTramp

Related Content

Letters: Eating less meat won't save the planet

The big issue, letters: Limiting or reducing global livestock numbers may be sensible but cutting demand for meat is not

13, Sep, 2008 @11:01 PM

Why eating less meat could cut global warming

It seems a surprising suggestion. Can it be true that what we put on our dinner plates could have an effect on global warming? It appears so. A new report is to warn the livestock industry generates 8 per cent of all UK greenhouse gas emissions - but that eating some meat is good for the planet. It will also say organic farming may be no better than intensive methods for reducing emissions, though organic practices have other advantages.

Juliette Jowit

11, Nov, 2007 @1:30 AM

Meat by numbers

It takes 7lb of grain to produce just one pound of beef and the average Briton eats eight cows in their lifetime

Caroline Davies

06, Sep, 2008 @11:01 PM

Is our taste for Sunday roast killing the planet?

A UN expert has blamed meat eaters for environmental mayhem as demand for beef drives deforestation, water scarcity, air pollution and climate change. Robin McKie and Caroline Davies report

Robin McKie and Caroline Davies

06, Sep, 2008 @11:01 PM

Article image
Giving up beef will reduce carbon footprint more than cars, says expert
Study shows red meat dwarfs others for environmental impact, using 28 times more land and 11 times water for pork or chicken

Damian Carrington

21, Jul, 2014 @9:00 PM

Article image
Climate impact labels could help people eat less red meat
Information on environmental impact can persuade consumers against carbon-heavy food choices, says study

Helena Horton Environment reporter

27, Dec, 2022 @4:00 PM

Article image
Cuts to abattoir meat checks 'will be the next food scandal'
Move to pare back independent inspections could lead to contamination risks 'far worse than horsemeat', union warns

Jamie Doward

19, Jan, 2013 @11:54 PM

Article image
UN urges global move to meat and dairy-free diet

Lesser consumption of animal products is necessary to save the world from the worst impacts of climate change, UN report says

Felicity Carus

02, Jun, 2010 @5:09 PM

Article image
Eating less meat essential to curb climate change, says report
Global livestock industry produces more greenhouse gas emissions than transport but fear of a consumer backlash is preventing action, says Chatham House report

Damian Carrington

03, Dec, 2014 @12:02 AM

Article image
Love meat too much for Veganuary? Try Regenuary instead
Proponents say the ‘regenerative farming’ eating challenge encourages consumption of more sustainable animal products – but is it just greenwash?

Phoebe Weston

15, Jan, 2022 @11:15 AM