Should we eat meat to save the planet? Today, diners are feasting at a plant-based Burger King pop-up in Switzerland. But some argue you do not need to be a vegetarian to fight climate change.
The ex-veggies eating beef to save the Earth
Should we eat meat to save the planet? Today, diners are feasting at a plant-based Burger King pop-up in Switzerland. But some argue you do not need to be a vegetarian to fight climate change.
At a restaurant in the Swiss city of Basel, an eager crowd is buzzing with excitement.
This is fast food, but not as they know it. For ten days only, the town is home to one of the world's first meat-free Burger Kings.
Gone are the Whopper burgers and chicken nuggets. Instead, fast food fans are slathering vegan mayonnaise on their plant-based wraps before polishing off the meal with a serving of vegan ice cream.
Tomorrow, the Burger King experiment in Basel and Geneva will draw to a close. But many believe the restaurant is a sign of bigger things to come. "Over time the amount of beef that we are selling as a proportion of our total sales is reducing," said Burger King UK CEO Alasdair Murdoch last year.
In the 21st Century, the arguments for going vegetarian seem overwhelming. For years, experts have warned that eating too much red meat is bad for both people and the planet.
Researchers estimate that the greenhouse gas emissions from beef production alone are equivalent to those of the whole of India. "A vegan diet is probably the single best way to reduce your impact on planet Earth," declares University of Oxford academic Joseph Poore.
And for the 50% of Britons who are estimated to be vegetarian or vegan by 2040, the good news keeps coming. Last June, a new study found that vegetarians were 73% less likely to be hit by severe coronavirus than meat-eaters.
But now, some former vegetarians and farmers are fighting back against what they see as a war on meat. They say the answer is changing how we farm livestock, not what we eat.
British food writer Clare Finney first became a vegetarian at age 12. "I felt like a war hero: a veteran vegetarian bearing the scars of decades of stuffed peppers and nut roasts."
But eventually, Finney became sceptical of plant-based alternatives. In the Californian summer, a single avocado tree needs up to 46 gallons of water every day - more than would fill a bathtub. Now, after speaking to a group of sustainable farmers, she is a meat eater once more.
Finney believes the answer to the climate conundrum is regenerative agriculture - a farming technique that reverses climate change by promoting biodiversity and returning organic matter to the soil.
When soil is healthy, it has a huge capacity to store carbon. But today, the soil of most Western farmland is not healthy at all.
In Britain, farmland is divided. Half grows crops dependent on inorganic and polluting fertilisers. The other half is filled to the brim with grain-fed livestock animals, producing an excess of the perfect natural fertiliser - manure.
Many believe the solution is mixed farming. "Bringing livestock back into rotation with crops... will reduce carbon emissions twofold, threefold," says Patrick Holden, the founder of the Sustainable Food Trust. Grazing animals can help restore the land, promoting the growth of healthy grass, healthy soil and ultimately storing carbon.
After all, Holden summarises: "It's not the cow - it's how."
<h5 class=" eplus-wrapper">Should we eat meat to save the planet?</h5>
Yes: Industrial grain-focused livestock farming is not the only option. It may sound strange, but eating more sustainably produced meat could actually be the solution to the climate crisis.
No: Regenerative agriculture only accounts for a small percentage of meat production. It is also expensive. We should focus on producing more nutritious meat alternatives instead.
Or... There is a middle ground. We should all try to reduce the amount of meat we eat, especially red meats such as beef. But there is no need to give up on meat altogether.
The ex-veggies eating beef to save the Earth
