Meat Vs. the SUV

The steak. The United Nations reported in November that livestock production must be cut in half to avoid further damaging the environment. According to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, livestock generates more greenhouse gas emissions, as measured in carbon dioxide equivalent, than transportation. So environmental groups have kicked off an advertising campaign to spread the veg-lovin' word.

The list of drawbacks from livestock is almost endless – methane and nitrous oxide pollution that contribute to global warming; soil erosion, antibiotics, hormones, fertilizers and pesticides that contribute to runoff and water pollution, etc. Livestock already take up almost a third of the Earth's entire land surface, and the business is still growing.

People want more meat and dairy. That means more forests will be turned into pastures, and more water and feed will be required – food that could go to hungry people rather than cows and pigs. Plus much of that feed is corn-based , which because of increasing ethanol production has already spiked land and feed costs for farmers, putting many out of jobs. Have we created a catch-22 for farmers?

Just as SUVs are still popular after much condemnation, I doubt many will lessen their meat intake either. But at least with proliferating cows environmentalists may take solace in the fact that we'll be able to harness more methane-based natural gas.