Scientists from the University of Georgia (UGA) found that several soybean products are responsible for this environmental harm. Soybean products such as tofu and tempeh, which are common in the vegan diet, are imported from places where their production can contribute to widespread deforestation and habitat loss. Moreover, the pollution and environmental impact of "transporting soybeans hundreds of thousands of miles to the U.S. is its own environmental catastrophe."
The UGA researchers also mentioned palm oil, often used as a vegan substitute for butter or lard, as another example. Palm oil is mostly imported from Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and Nigeria. However, they found that local ecosystems in the said nations "have been devastated by deforestation and loss of biodiversity as millions of hectares of forests are razed for palm oil production."
According to the study authors, many people believe that greenhouse gases from livestock would be reduced and climate change would be mitigated if they reduce their meat consumption. However, they pointed out that the focus should be placed on how the meat industry currently operates rather than on the animals themselves.
"Livestock is super important to both the sustainability of a farm system and to climate change mitigation," study author Amy Trauge argued.
She mentioned a hypothetical pig that can produce over 150 pounds of meat and 20 pounds of bacon as an example. A small-scale processing plant that avoids plastics and employs well-paid staff could be used to keep the supply chain short and transparent. She continued: "What is left in the wake of that pig's life is soil restoration, small-business health, human health and a short supply chain that is traceable."
"There's definitely an argument for reducing the amount of meat that we eat, but we can get a good deal of our protein needs to be met with a small number of animal products like meat or eggs."
According to mainstream media reports, livestock currently accounts for about 14.5 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. The United Nations also predicted that the world will be eating 14 percent more meat by 2030 as middle-income countries become wealthier. This sent climate alarmists rushing to remove any and all meat from the world's diet. (Related: Biden's Inflation Reduction Act imposes fee on greenhouse gas emissions.)
"That means more demand for pasture and feed crops, more deforestation and more climate problems," science writer Bob Holmes stated in an August 2022 op-ed for the Atlantic magazine. "For people alarmed about climate change, giving up meat altogether can seem like the only option."
However, Holmes challenged this perception, citing studies suggesting that the world could still raise livestock and poultry without having to worry about "climate change." According to the writer, a world with some animal agriculture might have a smaller environmental footprint than an entirely vegan world.
"It's not inevitable for livestock to compete with people for crops. Ruminants – grazing animals with multiple stomachs such as cattle, sheep and goats – can digest the cellulose in grass, straw and other fibrous plant material that humans can't eat, converting it into animal protein that we can."
"Livestock can also use crop wastes such as the bran and germ left over when wheat is milled to white flour, or the soy meal left over after pressing the beans for oil. That's a big reason 20 percent of the U.S. dairy herd is in California's Central Valley – where cows feed partly on wastes from fruits, nuts and other specialty crops. Even pigs and chickens, which can't digest cellulose, could be fed other wastes such as fallen fruit, discarded food scraps and insects – which most people wouldn't eat."
Watch this video that discusses veganism being unnatural and immoral.
This video is from the Cory - Nature Is The Answer channel on Brighteon.com.