As I expected, my first day at the 2008 Ecocity World Summit Main Conference was informative and thought-provoking. I attended a session focused on the environmental consequences of our choices in food. Unfortunately presenter Emmanuel Mukete, National Coordinator for the Cameroon EPA, was unable to attend the conference after being denied a visa at the U.S. Embassy in Cameroon.

Ambika Shukla, president of People for Animals in Deli, India gave a passionate talk about one of the most effective ways individuals can reduce their environmental impact: go vegetarian or vegan. While this wasn't my first exposure to this ideological argument, it was the most powerful.

Shukla began by citing statistics about urban poverty: 600 million city dwellers in India, and about 1 billion slum dwellers in developing countries. Rapid growth means that India has the largest construction market in the world, with about $10 billion in works. She spoke of the need to thoroughly review building energy and design, suggesting the adoption of solar captive houses, vertical expansion, removal of cars from cities, and to strengthen public transport systems.

However, Shukla considers the focus on these technology solutions as treating the symptom, but not the disease, which she believes is of a spiritual nature. I was intrigued to hear her say that the environmental crisis is in fact a spiritual crisis. While previous human cultures worshiped the Earth, new religions appear to grant humans domination of the Earth and all living things. Shukla contrasted this statement by saying that in India, Hinduism still dominates, maintaining a respect for nature. In her words, animals in cities represent green, and the "simplest and most crucial way to save our cities" is to become vegetarian.

Shukla produced a very convincing argument against eating meat. Not only can it be harmful to your health, it is certainly taxing for the planet. Meat consumes land, water, and fossil fuels in greater amounts per calorie than agricultural products. Consider: pastures, grain, and water for cows, oil to transport them before and after slaughter, and the presence of meat-packing districts in cities that Shukla says breed filth and desensitize people to violence.

She says each quarter pound burger consumes 55 square feet of tropical rain forest. Meat requires 10 times more energy in cereals and grains than it eventually produces. Instead of wasting 78 calories of fossil fuels for every 1 calorie of meat energy, why not go vegan?

The world population is projected to reach 9 billion people by 2050, which would overwhelm the planet if everyone were a carnivore. Thus, Shukla says the argument is not only ethical, but strongly environmental as well.

I have made a sincere effort to decrease my meat consumption in recent years. Already, I considered the ethics surrounding farming and slaughter practices. I reasoned that eating organic, and only on occasion were good ways to alleviate those concerns. Now, I can't escape the knowledge of environmental impact. The idea of contributing to world hunger, pollution, and climate change just because I like the taste of a fillet is no longer merely a menu choice to me, but a question of environmental responsibility.