Abstract
The world has always been concerned with its future. That concern has become endemic in this era. Global climate change is a new term introduced in our generation. As Pogo famously said, “we have found the enemy, and it is us.” Unfortunately, the almost miracle accomplished by ruminant animals in converting lignified materials into healthful, delicious foods also requires the production of methane and other by-products that have been condemned as contributors to global climate change. Therefore, an important extrinsic character of red meat in many markets is how much damage to the environment and to our collective future on the planet did the production of the red meat contribute. This chapter presents a review of the scientific literature concerning the science underlying ruminal fermentation and the consequences of fermentation on the environment as well as discovery of technologies to ameliorate these consequences.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Bittman, M. 2008. Rethinking the meat guzzler. Retrieved January 18, 2012, from The New York Times Web site. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/27/weekinreview/27bittman.html?emc=eta1.
Bouwman, A.F., K.W. Van der Hoek, B. Eickhout, and I. Soenario. 2005. Exploring changes in world ruminant production systems. Agricultural Systems 84: 121–153.
Capper, J.L. 2010. The environmental impact of conventional, natural and grass-fed beef production systems. In Proceedings of the greenhouse gases and animal agriculture conference 2010, Banff, Canada.
———. 2011. The environmental impact of beef production in the United States: 1977 compared with 2007. Journal of Animal Science 89: 4249–4261.
Capper, J.L., E. Castaneda-Gutierrez, R.A. Cady, and D.E. Bauman. 2008. The environmental impact of recombinant bovine somatotropin (rbST) use in dairy production. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 105: 9668–9673.
Capper, J.L., R.A. Cady, and D.E. Bauman. 2009. The environmental impact of dairy production: 1944 compared with 2007. Journal of Animal Science 87: 2160–2167.
Cederberg, C., U.M. Persson, K. Neovius, S. Molander, and R. Clift. 2011. Including carbon emissions from deforestation in the carbon footprint of Brazilian beef. Environmental Science and Technology 45: 1773–1779.
Chang, S. 2009. UCLA goes green. Available at the Los Angeles Times Web site: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/greenspace/2009/04/ucla-takes-collectivegreen-action-.html. Retrieved January 18, 2012.
FAOSTAT. 2015. FAO statistical database. Access in February 2015.
Gerber, P.J., B. Henderson, C. Opio, A. Mottet, and H. Steinfeld. 2013. Tackling climate change through livestock — A global assessment of emissions and mitigation opportunities. Rome: FAO.
Gerber, P.J., A. Mottet, C.A. Opio, and F.T. Falcucci. 2015. Environmental impacts of beef production: Review of challenges and perspectives for durability. Meat Science 109: 2–12.
Herrero, M., P. Havlík, H. Valin, A. Notenbaert, M.C. Rufino, P.K. Thornton, et al. 2013. Biomass use, production, feed efficiencies, and greenhouse gas emissions from global livestock systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 110: 20888–20893.
Hristov, A.N., J. Oh, J.L. Firkins, J. Dijkstra, E. Kebreab, G. Waghorn, H.P.S. Makkar, A.T. Adesogan, W. Yang, C. Lee, P.J. Gerber, B. Henderson, and J.M. Tricarico. 2013a. Special Topics—Mitigation of methane and nitrous oxide emissions from animal operations: I. A review of enteric methane mitigation options. Journal of Animal Science 91: 5045–5069.
Hristov, A.N., T. Ott, J. Tricarico, A. Rotz, G. Waghorn, A. Adesogan, J. Dijkstra, F. Montes, J. Oh, E. Kebreab, S.J. Oosting, P.J. Gerber, B. Henderson, H.P.S. Makkar, and J.L. Firkins. 2013b. SPECIAL TOPICS—Mitigation of methane and nitrous oxide emissions from animal operations: III. A review of animal management mitigation options. Journal of Animal Science 91: 5095–5113.
Hylanda, J.J., M. Henchiona, M. McCarthy, and S.N. McCarthya. 2017. The role of meat in strategies to achieve a sustainable diet lower in greenhouse gas emissions. A review of Meat Science 132: 189–195.
Keyzer, M.A., M.D. Merbis, I.F.P.W. Pavel, and C.F.A. van Wesenbeeck. 2005. Diet shifts towards meat and the effects on cereal use: Can we feed the animals in 2030? Ecological Economics 55: 187–202.
Koneswaran, G., and D. Nierenberg. 2008. Global farm animal production and global warming: Impacting and mitigating climate change. Environmental Health Perspectives 116: 578–582.
Lee, C., and K.A. Beauchemin. 2014. A review of feeding supplementary nitrate to ruminant animals: Nitrate toxicity, methane emissions, and production performance. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 94: 557–570.
Naumann, H.D., L.O. Tedeschi, and M.A. Fonseca. 2015. Technical Note: Predicting ruminal methane inhibition by condensed tannins using nonlinear exponential decay regression analysis1. Journal of Animal Science 93: 5341–5345.
Nierenberg, D. 2005. Happier meals: Rethinking the global meat industry. Worldwatch Paper 171, Worldwatch, Washington, DC.
Patra, A.K. 2014. A meta-analysis of the effect of dietary fat on enteric methane production, digestibility and rumen fermentation in sheep, and a comparison of these responses between cattle and sheep. Livestock Science 162: 97–103.
Place, S.E., and F.M. Mitloehner. 2012. Review: Beef production in balance: Considerations for life cycle analyses. Meat Science 92: 179–181.
Richardson, I., C.A. Duthie, J. Hyslop, J. Rooke, and R. Roehe. 2019. Nutritional strategies to reduce methane emissions from cattle: Effects on meat eating quality and retail shelf life of loin steaks. Meat Science 153: 51–57.
Rosenthal, E. 2008. As more eat meat, a bid to cut emissions. Retrieved January 18, 2012, from The New York Times Web site: Available at http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/04/science/earth/04meat.html?emc=eta1.
Sauvant, D., and S. Giger-Reverdin. 2009. Modélisation des interactions digestives et de la production de méthane chez les ruminants. INRA Production Animale 22: 375–384.
Smith, J. 2015. The meat we eat, the lives we lift. Livestock (like people) are different the world over. The Economist. Available at http://www.economistinsights.com/opinion/meat-we-eat-lives-we-lift.
Steinfeld, H., P. Gerber, T. Wassenaar, V. Castel, M. Rosales, and C. de Haan. 2006. Livestock’s long shadow—Environmental issues and options. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN.
US Census Bureau. 2008. Total midyear population for the world, 1950–2050. Washington, DC: US Census Bureau.
Yang, C.J., J.A. Rooke, I. Cabeza, and R.J. Wallace. 2016. Nitrate and inhibition of ruminal methanogenesis: Microbial ecology, obstacles, and opportunities for lowering methane emissions from ruminant livestock. Frontiers in Microbiology 7: 132.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. and Science Press
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Holloway, J.W., Wu, J. (2019). Environmental Impact. In: Red Meat Science and Production. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-7856-0_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-7856-0_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-13-7855-3
Online ISBN: 978-981-13-7856-0
eBook Packages: Chemistry and Materials ScienceChemistry and Material Science (R0)