Prime Minister Boris Johnson is being pressed for ‘deliberately’ not mentioning animal agriculture and meat consumption in a vital environmental policy.
Despite urgent calls for the PM to encourage slashing meat intake by half, there’s a ‘glaring omission’ in the Net-Zero Strategy: and The Vegetarian Society is not happy about it.
Boris Johnson slammed for Net-Zero Strategy
Boris Johnson set out the long-awaited Net-Zero Strategy earlier this week. In essence, it’s a caucus of plans to help the country reach net-zero carbon emissions.
And the 368-page report will place the UK as the world leader in the ‘race’ to hitting the target, according to Johnson.
But the politician was called out for leaving out any recommendations to reduce meat intake, in order to help reduce the emissions.
And as a result, The Vegetarian Society reacted. The organization penned a letter to the PM ‘seeking to understand why the issue of diet and animal agriculture appears to have been deliberately omitted’.
Why was meat reduction not mentioned?
Chief executive Richard McIlwain told PBN: “Given that 15 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions come from animal agriculture.
“And, that the government’s own National Food Strategy suggests a 30 percent reduction in meat consumption by 2030 in order to hit climate targets, it is difficult to understand why this issue has not been made a central plank of the strategy.”
In such a ‘critical’ decade in the fight to mitigate the climate emergency, reducing meat intake must be a part of the strategy, McIlwain warns.
He added: “Choosing more plant-based meals over meat is one of the quickest and easiest ways anyone can reduce their carbon footprint. And, collectively as a nation that would create a huge impact.”
0
Leave a Comment
Plant Based News Comment Policy
In short:- If you act with maturity and consideration for other users, you should have no problems. Please read our Comment policy before commenting.
Interesting! A small minority of people with little knowledge of agriculture or the environment trying to impose their personal views on a government and the general population. Do these people not realise that with the exception of small organic producers the only farms that are completely carbon neutral and wildlife friendly are integrated or livestock only. Whilst the horrors of factory livestock farming have been well and rightly documented little is said about an arable system that depletes the soil and drenches everything in toxic chemicals. In recent years studies have begun to concentrate on nitrous oxide as a major problem. 75% of anthropogenic nitrous oxide worldwide comes from tilled farmland it has a global warming potential almost 300 times greater than carbon and a lifespan of 110yrs. The use of herbicides, fungicides and insecticides has played a massive role in the depletion of wildlife. Rather than telling people which foods they should eat, governments should concentrate on quality agricultural reform and allow people to make their own dietary choices based on what is available.
It is not true that a lot more land is required to grow plants to feed livestock and thus increase the issue of tilled farmland and pesticide usage? I have worked in plant agriculture and from what I can see. Industrial use of pesticide is declining and pest control alternatives are rising. With the use of biological predators, traps, barriers, etc.. The alternatives for farming is rising. The response from the government is vital as they issue subsidies to farmers. Farming as a whole cannot be ignored. Period.
Here here, I totally agree with everything you have said
In properly managed systems no feed is required which is why it’s often called No Input Farming, no fertiliser, chemicals or feed are imported.
If you’ve been involved with Arable Agriculture the attached website, from the University of California should explain what’s going on.
https://www.csuchico.edu/regenerativeagriculture/
In properly managed systems no feed is required which is why it’s often called No Input Farming, no fertiliser, chemicals or feed are imported.
If you’ve been involved with Arable Agriculture the attached website, from the University of California should explain what’s going on.
https://www.csuchico.edu/regenerativeagriculture/
Carbon neutral animal farms are a myth pushed by the renewable animal agriculture lobbies.
https://newrepublic.com/article/163735/myth-regenerative-ranching
https://www.truthordrought.com/small-local-animal-farm-myths
“Carbon neutral animal farms a myth”? 60 million Bison in the Mid West of America+ millions more in Eurasia plus multi millions of other foregut ruminants don’t seem to have done any harm over millions of years until they were butchered by “enlightened Europeans”.
Renewable? Should read “regenerative”. Regenerative Agriculture Lobby? Unfortunately no such thing.
You can forget the two web links you attached. One is a vegan site which comes from the fixed position of denigrating anything to do with livestock. The other uses a poorly conducted grazing system as an example which has nothing to do with Regenerative Ag and is written by two people who are anti meat ( I’ve checked ). These people don’t seem to realise that most Regenerative Ag is about soil quality and growing crops. Integrated livestock and grassland regeneration are only a part of a vast number of different techniques.
Worldwide we are running out of topsoil at a rate of 23 hectares a minute 24/7. No soil no food.