Careful With What You Eat: Diets generate emissions of gases

We are fully convinced that our health signs indicate that we have the opportunity to live and if we manage guarantee within reach the possibility of taking what we want to achieve. A day in favor of our living, we conducted the action of eating to nourish our bodies, an action that should be well controlled, especially in an age where you should be careful about the pollution, so that it creates the greenhouse effect.

Probably a significant number of inhabitants of this planet have not become aware of what products currently generate eat, how they affect our health and the environment in which we live. "Going from the usual American diet to a vegetarian diet could reduce emissions by 1.5 tons of CO2 eq per person," said Astrid Scholz, Ecotrust ecological economist, think-tank based in Portland, Oregon If you can deal with life without a steak, could soon be a meat substitute that could also significantly reduce CO2 eq emissions: in vitro meat.

The fact that an interesting paper on this subject of Bijal Trivedi points out that a recent study suggested that, on average, 8.1 tons of food generated carbon dioxide emissions (CO2) or CO2 equivalent (a measure that incorporates other harmful gases produced by the CO2). That means almost twice the 4.4 tonnes of CO2 equivalent emitted by typical annual mileage in the United States. As the emissions of these gases are increasingly attracting criticism, it has urged emissions are calculated hundreds of products and manufacturing processes, so that consumers can make food choices are less harmful to the environment. Indicates that in the UK, some supermarkets have begun pilot programs to label foods that indicate traces of carbon they produce.

A producer of chips being labeled a few lines with CO2 eq: 34.5 grams each packet that leaves the factory is responsible for 75 grams of CO2 eq. The Carbon Trust, London, is working on a standard so that companies can continue to track the CO2 eq of any product. Very interesting your question on how we calculate the trace of CO2 eq in your stomach? In this regard says: It is far from simple. To begin, we should analyze the amount of energy used from farm to fork, to measure their contribution to greenhouse gas. Thus, a food produced using wind or solar power will generate fewer emissions than those based on gas or coal.

For meat or dairy products should also be considered emissions of methane and nitrous oxide, two potent greenhouse gases. Total emissions of a food depends largely on where it comes from and how it was transformed into his dinner from the raw material. This includes the gases generated by tilling the soil, planting crops, pesticides and fertilizers, harvesting and transport to processing plants, as well as electricity for cleaning, processing and packaging of food, and then transport from shops.

Finally, consider the clearing of forests for grazing or cultivation. The calculations have become "fiendishly complicated", said Astrid Scholz. Is added in the analysis finds that when it comes to foods that have the greatest potential for global warming, red meat products are among the worst. Cattle ranching is responsible for 18% of greenhouse emissions caused by man: 9% of all CO2, 35 to 40% of methane and nitrous oxide 65%. Ruminants exhale CO2 just like us, but also produce methane.

Can the animals' diet make a difference? The beef from grass-fed often traded as cleaner and greener than the grain fed because cows do not consume high-energy crops. However, this is confusing, as Kebreab Emias University of Manitoba in Winnipeg. Kebreab developed a computer model of the digestive system of cows and were examined whether or grass seeds that produce more methane, and found that grass-fed cows produce, in fact, more methane than those fed grain. Fortunately, an alternative seems to be emerging remarkable animal eliminate the production process altogether and, instead, grow meat in Cuba. "With in vitro meat, do not hold the body," says Matheny.

It seems to appear in supermarkets Vitria meat in this regard, Bijal Trivedi says that in vitro meat has been developed for decades but has only recently begun to be seen as a viable alternative to cattle ranching. In the first in vitro meat symposium held at the Norwegian Institute of Food Research, near Oslo, in April, Stig Omholt William, University of Norway, suggested that large-scale production in vitro meat could be applied Today at around 3400 euros a tonne, making it competitive with that from farms.

In one scenario, the meat would be grown from stem cells of the thigh of cows, pigs and sheep. The cells are joined by small spheres or scaffolds to 3D and then be grown in a nutrient broth until the muscle cell clusters were large enough to be harvested. The first meat "test tube" to hit the market possibly for burgers, sausages, chicken nuggets and other minced meat products. While in vitro meat will not be free of greenhouse gases, emissions will be much lower. No methane emissions from animals or fertilizer or by deforestation and pasture degradation.

Given this quality there are divided opinions on what this represents for the farming industry, and someone commented: The bulk of the effort to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) can not pass by agriculture and livestock, because it would affect food security. Developed countries are the ones to lead the effort to mitigate climate change, as set out in the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. In particular, the transport sector, these countries recorded a steady increase in GHG emissions. The fact that due to the serious problems that is causing the greenhouse effect in the present, determine their causes and attack from the outset. No doubt that the contributions from thought-provoking Trivedi and take precautions. * Source Journal of Buenos Aires Nation (health section)

...