The climate crisis is a problem so immense that it can, for the average person, be too overwhelming to comprehend. If you’re like me, you have attempted to make small, tangible changes in your life, such as recycling or buying second-hand clothes, to at least feel like you are doing your part. Switching to a meat-free diet seems like one of the best ways to live more sustainably and reduce your individual carbon emissions. Plant-based diets are on the rise among Americans, as 10-15% identify as either vegetarian or vegan, and three-fifths of American households eat meat-free meals part time. But are widespread plant-based diets the environmental remedy we are hoping for?
In reality, plant-based diets are not as “environmentally-friendly” as is widely believed. Although plant-based meat substitutes on average have a 50% lower environmental impact than meat, the majority of plant-based products consumed by Americans are still produced through industrial farming techniques characterized by monocultures and harmful chemical fertilizers that contribute to the depletion of soil health, deforestation, pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, and threats to biodiversity.
Not to mention, plenty of popular plant-based foods such as avocados, mushrooms, and almonds also have a substantial environmental toll, especially if they are imported from across the world. As a vegetarian myself, I always question whether my diet—characterized by daily coffees, snacks wrapped in single-use plastics, and copious avocados—is as “green” as I hope.
This points to an important distinction: a sustainable diet is not defined by the kinds of food you eat, but in how they are produced.
The problem lies in the system in which meat is produced, typified by widespread factory farms with horrific conditions (both for their workers and the animals they slaughter) that prioritize profit above all else. Large-scale factory farm operations threaten the local environment, as they convert local ecosystems into industrial-style farmland and deposit agricultural runoff into waterways. The key to building a sustainable, zero-carbon society is reforming these unjust, destructive, profit-hungry systems, not placing all of the responsibility on the shoulders of individuals.
The question should not be whether one should become vegan or vegetarian either. This may sound counterintuitive, but hunting, when properly regulated, is arguably one of the most sustainable methods to consume meat. In many Indigenous cultures, taking an animal’s life is a sacred act, and ethics of sustainability are already built into many traditional hunting practices. Likewise, although many people (including myself) recoil at the idea of hunting cute animals like deer, venison from a deer you hunted yourself is one of the most eco-friendly foods on the planet, especially as deer overpopulation causes environmental damage in many regions.
Despite these sustainable alternatives to acquiring meat, the reality is that most people will still get the majority of their food from supermarkets. While browsing the aisles, most Americans don’t really know where their food is coming from or how it was made. Did the cow that provided the beef graze in the open air or did it live and die in confinement within a factory farm?
Not to mention, switching your diet is really only available to those who are privileged enough to afford the switch. Although fruits and vegetables are generally cheaper than meat, plant-based meat is more expensive than animal-based counterparts.
Beyond the price tag, making such a drastic change in diet requires additional time and energy that many working Americans simply do not have. Those worrying about where their next meal will come from can’t think about whether it will contain animal products as well. Additionally, for many, going meat-free would also mean losing touch with cultural foods that are meaningful to them, as many cultures and religions have meat-based meals that carry spiritual or symbolic significance.
Expecting every individual consumer to meticulously research the origins of their food in order to ensure maximum sustainability is entirely unreasonable. So is asking people to abandon culturally significant cuisines because of systems outside of their control. This is why the system must change in tandem with shifts in consumer behavior. Achieving net-zero carbon emissions will require an almost total transition to regenerative agriculture, which is a collection of practices that aim to maintain soil health, maximize biodiversity, and minimize carbon emissions by reducing the use of heavy machinery. Ensuring that almost all food products on the market are produced sustainably and ethically makes a consumer’s capacity for change more realistic.
These changes will not come easily, but all of this is not to discourage you or make you crumble in hopeless despair. Yes, do anything you can to reduce your carbon emissions if you have the capacity. Switch to a plant-based diet if you want to—or even just commit to eating less meat than before. Even better, support local or regenerative farms if they are available to you or volunteer for community organizations in your area that are fighting for more sustainable food production. But don’t get discouraged if you feel like you aren’t reaching some ideal of what the “perfect” sustainable lifestyle is. You are only one person; your choice of what protein to put on your salad is not going to end the world. There are broader inequitable systems at play that are working against your efforts to be an ethical consumer.
Individuals can support meaningful change by being conscious consumers, but, above all, we need an equitable food system that treats the animals we consume humanely and prioritizes the planet over profit.
