Large-scale, modern farms produce proportionately less carbon dioxide

By TIM HEARDEN

Capital Press

When it comes to food consumption, choices that consumers think are the most environmentally friendly often aren't, a group of researchers contend.

For instance, if everyone bought their meat, eggs and milk from local farmers' markets and grass-fed beef operations, the practice could actually result in more greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere.

A trio of researchers, including Washington State University dairy sciences instructor Judith Capper, examined such impacts in the paper "Demystifying the Environmental Sustainability of Food Production," which was published in the Proceedings of the Cornell Nutrition Conference 2009.

The scientists assert that consumers and government leaders should take "a whole-system approach" that assesses environmental impact per gallon of milk, pound of beef or dozen eggs.

The researchers state they don't begrudge efforts by individuals to soften their impact on nature, but they urge consumers and politicians to consider how improved efficiencies in mass production benefit the planet.

"We wanted to look at some of the myths that are out there," Capper said. "There's a lot of information that to consumers intuitively makes sense. You hear a lot about 'food miles' ... (but) the intuitively correct answer isn't always the correct answer.

"We wanted to take a closer scientific look at things that are out there that seemed sensible but are not always right there," she said.

Capper presented the group's findings at last month's 71st Cornell Nutrition Conference in Syracuse, N.Y. Her paper was co-authored by Roger Cady, senior technical consultant at Elanco Animal Health, and Dale Bauman, an animal science instructor at Cornell University.

The scientists' work calls into question the environmental benefits of consumers' efforts to "buy local" and eat grass-fed beef.

For instance, in 2007 the U.S. dairy industry produced 8.3 billion more gallons of milk than in 1944, but because of improved productivity, the industry's carbon footprint was reduced by 41 percent over that period, the scientists state. Thus, the greenhouse gas emissions per gallon of milk decreased 63 percent.

Moreover, a dozen eggs taken to a grocery store in a tractor-trailer that can carry thousands of such packages is a more fuel-efficient option than eggs purchased at a farmers' market or local farm, Capper said.

"As a consumer as opposed to a scientist, I've had the same thoughts that the dairy industry back in 1944 was all warm and fuzzy and beautiful and great and there were no environmental issues, and that food that comes from a local farmers' market must be more environmentally friendly than food carried a long distance," Capper said. "When we looked at it, we realized that productivity was the key to the whole picture."

While pasture- and grass-fed meat is growing more popular, to finish the entire U.S. cattle population of 9.8 million on pasture would require an extra 60 million acres of land, and it would take twice the time to bring animals to slaughter weight, the researchers state.

"In an ideal world, I would like every consumer to make informed choices based on logic," Capper said. "It's very easy to have the warm, fuzzy-type image, but that isn't always the whole picture when we look at it scientifically.

"We have an ever-increasing population," she said, "and as we want to feed that population, productivity really is a key to doing that."

Online

"Demystifying the Environmental Sustainability of Food Production": http://wsu.academia.edu/documents/0046/7264/2009_Cornell_Nutrition_Conference_Capper_et_al.pdf.