"All the World's a Stage We Pass Through" R. Ayana

Showing posts with label sustainable agriculture. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sustainable agriculture. Show all posts

Thursday, 30 June 2016

Climate Change Ruins Food: Rising CO2 is reducing nutritional value of food, impacting ecosystems


Climate Change Ruins Food
Rising CO2 is reducing nutritional value of food, impacting ecosystems

Women harvest rice in Nepal. An estimated two billion people are already deficient in dietary zinc and iron, an aspect of malnutrition that has been termed “hidden hunger”. Some researchers think that shifts in nutritional content in major crops as a consequence of increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide could lead to more people being at risk of mineral deficiencies. Photo courtesy of the International Rice Research Institute on Flickr under a CC BY-NC-SA 2.0 license.



 Women harvest rice in Nepal. An estimated two billion people are already deficient in dietary zinc and iron, an aspect of malnutrition that has been termed “hidden hunger”. Some researchers think that shifts in nutritional content in major crops as a consequence of increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide could lead to more people being at risk of mineral deficiencies. 
Photo courtesy of the International Rice Research Institute on Flickr under a CC BY-NC-SA 2.0 license.




Heightened atmospheric CO2 levels are cutting the proportions of protein and other vital nutrients in plants, impacting crops, people, pollinators and ecosystems.


Rice fields in Kashmir, India. Staple crops such as rice and wheat are forecast to become less nutritious as a result of increasing carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere. Photo courtesy of sandeepachetan.com travel photography on Flickr under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 license
Rice fields in Kashmir, India. Staple crops such as rice and wheat are forecast to become less nutritious as a result of increasing carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere. 
Photo courtesy of sandeepachetan.com travel photography on Flickr under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 license


  • As CO2 levels rise, so do carbohydrates in plants, increasing food’s sugar content. While carbon-enriched plants grow bigger, scientists are finding that they contain proportionately less protein and nutrients such as zinc, magnesium and calcium.
  • A meta-analysis of 7,761 observations of 130 plant species found that overall mineral concentrations in plants declined by about 8 percent in response to elevated CO2 levels — 25 minerals decreased, including iron, zinc, potassium and magnesium.
  • New research found that as atmospheric CO2 rose from preindustrial to near current levels, the protein content in goldenrod pollen fell by 30 percent. Bees and other pollinators rely heavily on goldenrod as protein-rich food for overwintering. The loss of pollinators could devastate many of the world’s food crops.
  • Research into the correlation between CO2 concentrations and the nutrient content of food is in its early stages. More study is urgently needed to determine how crops and ecosystems will be altered as fossil fuels are burned, plus mitigation strategies.


Among the myriad impacts climate change is having on the world, one in particular may come as a surprise: heightened atmospheric CO2 levels might be adversely affecting the nutritional quality of the food you eat. As carbon dioxide in the atmosphere continues to increase, you could end up eating more sugar and less of important minerals such as zinc, magnesium and calcium — without even realizing it. Those effects could also be reverberating up the food chain and altering ecosystems in as yet poorly understood ways.

For plants, a rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide actually boosts productivity by stimulating photosynthesis. They make more carbohydrate and grow larger — seemingly a good thing. But because other nutrients don’t increase and can’t keep pace with the augmented carbohydrate, this potential boon to our food supply isn’t all that it seems: plants end up having a higher carbohydrate to protein ratio, and relatively lower concentrations of minerals.

Put simply: atmospheric carbon dioxide acts as a sort of fertilizer to grow bigger, leafier plants, but those larger broccolis and lettuces actually contain less nutritional value per portion than their predecessors grown in the preindustrial, pre-fossil fuel world.

And that could be a problem for the world’s already malnourished people, for bees seeking protein-rich pollen so they can safely overwinter, and for ecosystems that could be thrown out of balance by changes in plant nutrition.

The human implications of these ongoing changes to our food supply came under the spotlight in April when the US Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) published a major report on the impact of climate change on human health. One of its key findings was that rising carbon dioxide will reduce the nutritional quality of food.

Allison Crimmins, of the US Environmental Protection Agency, and a lead author of the food safety chapter in the USGCRP report, told Mongabay about some of the ways in which this is likely to be felt around the world: “In certain developing countries, reduced nutritional value of foods will aggravate existing protein deficiencies, particularly in children. In the US and other developed countries however, dietary protein deficiencies are uncommon. In those cases, an increased ratio of carbohydrates and fewer essential minerals — essentially more starchy and more sugary foods — could potentially contribute to or exacerbate existing chronic dietary deficiencies or obesity risks, though how big a role this impact would play on a person’s overall nutrition remains uncertain.”


Deciphering the CO2 / plant nutrition relationship


In a 2014 study that informed the USGCRP report, researcher Irakli Loladze, of the Bryan College of Health Sciences, described the projected increase in dietary starch and carbohydrate as comparable to adding a “spoonful of sugars” to each 100 grams (3.5 ounces) of dry plant matter. When we’re being told not to eat more than a few teaspoons-worth of sugar per day, this sounds like a lot.

What will be the consequences, Loladze asks, if this additional sugar intake is unavoidable and lifelong? How, for example, might that extra daily suger exacerbate the health problems of the 25 million Americans, 98.4 million Chinese, and 65 million Indians who are part of the growing global diabetes epidemic? And how might those health impacts escalate as atmospheric carbon levels rise annually through the 21st century?

Loladze’s meta-study — which examined thousands of observations of plants grown under high carbon dioxide conditions — was an attempt to prove a theoretical prediction he made back in 2002. We’ve known for decades that plants grown under high carbon dioxide conditions have reduced protein concentrations, and the mechanism behind that change is fairly well understood: more carbohydrate dilutes the protein within the leaf. In addition, increased CO2 changes the rate of transpiration — the uptake of water through the roots and evaporation through the leaves — and affects the amount of nutrients plants draw from the soil. However, higher rates of photosynthesis have different effects on different minerals.


Wheat. Carbon dioxide promotes plant growth by boosting photosynthesis and carbohydrate production in the plant. But other nutrients don’t keep pace with this increase, resulting in higher carbohydrate to protein ratios, and lower concentrations of minerals. These shifts in nutritional quality could have implications for human health around the world. Photo courtesy of Žarko Å uÅ¡njar on Flickr, under a CC BY-SA 2.0 license
Wheat. Carbon dioxide promotes plant growth by boosting photosynthesis and carbohydrate production in the plant. But other nutrients don’t keep pace with this increase, resulting in higher carbohydrate to protein ratios, and lower concentrations of minerals. These shifts in nutritional quality could have implications for human health around the world. Photo courtesy of Žarko Å uÅ¡njar on Flickr, under a CC BY-SA 2.0 license


A theory known as ecological stoichiometry — which examines the balance of chemical elements in living systems — led Loladze to reason that minerals should also be affected by a proportional increase in carbohydrate synthesis and the associated knock-on effects this has on plant metabolism. But although a few studies supported his hypothesis in the early 2000s, the evidence was limited.

“There was considerable opposition to my idea,” Loladze told Mongabay. “The stoichiometric theory [upon which I based my argument] was not well known back then. Being a mathematician, I was viewed by some plant experts as an outsider with simplistic arguments that would not pan out in the real world.”

No one would fund the large-scale research effort Loladze needed to investigate his prediction further. Lacking backing and unemployed, he remained determined to test his theory with data. “With no money and no academic affiliation, the only way to get data was to compile [findings] from the existing literature,” he said.

Meanwhile, scientists around the world were increasingly studying the CO2 nutrient effects that interested Loladze, but their results were perplexing: while increases in atmospheric carbon decreased plant mineral concentrations in some studies, minerals increased in others, or showed no significant change

Loladze combined the data from numerous studies — that together had highly variable results — into one large meta-analysis, and he found a clear signal in the noise. A decade after he began work, he proved his prediction to be correct: when he collated the results of 7,761 observations of 130 plant species, he found that overall mineral concentrations in plant tissues declined by around 8 percent in response to elevated carbon dioxide levels. In all, 25 minerals were found to decrease, including iron, zinc, potassium and magnesium.


Tussock moth caterpillars feeding on leaves. Plants and the insects that feed on them form the basis of most terrestrial ecosystems, so nutritional shifts caused by rising atmospheric carbon dioxide levels will likely have impacts that extend up the food chain, but as ecosystems are so complex, it’s difficult to predict exactly how those changes will play out over time. Photo courtesy of Bjorn Watland on Flickr under a CC BY-SA 2.0 license
Tussock moth caterpillars feeding on leaves. Plants and the insects that feed on them form the basis of most terrestrial ecosystems, so nutritional shifts caused by rising atmospheric carbon dioxide levels will likely have impacts that extend up the food chain, but as ecosystems are so complex, it’s difficult to predict exactly how those changes will play out over time. Photo courtesy of Bjorn Watland on Flickr under a CC BY-SA 2.0 license


“One important aspect of Loladze’s study is its emphasis on trace elements, like zinc,” James Elser, of Arizona State University, and a proponent of the ecological stoichiometry theory on which Loladze based his work, told Mongabay. “These are often neglected in considerations of plant nutrition but agronomists and others are increasingly aware of the importance of these trace elements [not only] in limiting crop production, but also in human health and are now provisioning them in fertilizers.”

At the same time Loladze was looking at all available data on the nutrient responses of plants, Samuel Myers of Harvard University was also trying to pinpoint the impact of carbon dioxide on plant mineral content.

Whereas Loladze included data on wild as well as food crop species, and non-edible tissues as well as edible, Myers focused specifically on zinc and iron in six food crops. His research team grew the crops under different atmospheric CO2 conditions, and found a similar pattern: both zinc and iron declined by about 5-10 percent in wheat, rice, soybeans, and field peas when grown in a high carbon dioxide setting.


On the trail of trace elements and “hidden hunger”


Although a more consistent picture is now emerging of what happens to plant nutrients as carbon dioxide levels rise, it’s still not clear exactly how serious a problem this will be for people’s health.

Minor changes in mineral concentrations are unlikely to affect people already consuming more than sufficient quantities for good health, like many in the industrialized world. And if edible plants grow larger under higher carbon dioxide, then simply eating more may compensate for the reduced mineral concentration, though this could have consequences in terms of extra calories consumed.


Goldenrod in Virginia, USA. This is an essential late season source of food for bees, but a recent study found that with rising carbon dioxide levels, the nutritional quality of its pollen is decreasing. This could affect bee survival over the winter. Pollinators such as bees play a crucial part in our food supply. Photo courtesy of Bridget Leyendecker on Flickr under a CC BY 2.0 license.Goldenrod in Virginia, USA. This is an essential late season source of food for bees, but a recent study found that with rising carbon dioxide levels, the nutritional quality of its pollen is decreasing. This could affect bee survival over the winter. Pollinators such as bees play a crucial part in our food supply. Photo courtesy of Bridget Leyendecker on Flickr under a CC BY 2.0 license.


This picture changes markedly in the developing world. Deficiencies in micronutrients are globally common there, with an estimated 2 billion people lacking in dietary zinc and iron — a serious problem long recognized by the United Nations. As the USGCRP report stated, “Globally, chronic dietary deficiencies of micronutrients such as vitamin A, iron, iodine, and zinc contribute to “hidden hunger,” in which the consequences of the micronutrient insufficiency may not be immediate­ly visible or easily observed. This type of micro­nutrient deficiency constitutes one of the world’s leading health risk factors and adversely affects metabolism, the immune system, cognitive devel­opment and maturation — particularly in children.” The report also noted that around 40 percent of people in the US are likely consuming less than the average daily requirement of calcium and magnesium.

Given the current prevalence of “hidden hunger” some experts expect that rising CO2 levels and corresponding declines in plant nutrition could have a major impact on the health of those already suffering from, or at risk of, malnutrition — with developing nations in Africa and Asia likely to be the hardest hit.

But more research is needed to quantify potential impacts. Studies such as those done by Loladze and Myers have so far only looked at the plants themselves, and not the food products that arise from them, cautions Elser. This “doesn’t necessarily represent the nutritional contents of the foods at the point of consumption, once they have been processed and prepared. So, the ultimate nutritional impact of the CO2 effect requires more investigation.”

“I agree that the conclusions in both [studies] are somewhat alarming, but they should be taken for what they are — just a couple of papers making estimations of potential impact that need to be verified by agroecology, climate, types of foods, etc,” Patrick Webb, Professor of Nutrition at Tufts University, told Mongabay. “And remember that over the [20th century] time-frames the [studies] refer to, there is a rapid expansion of bio-fortified cropping (non-GMO) and a surge in processed food consumption globally, much of which is micrononutrient fortified. I only say this to point out that these papers don’t lead to a conclusion that ‘we’re going to run out of nutrients!’ Simply, that we need to be wary of these kinds of potentially negative impacts of GHGs [greenhouse gases] even on our food supply, and such impacts are bound to be greater in some places than others.”


Native bees, wasps, butterflies, moths, flies and other wild pollinators are vital to the world’s agriculture and to ecosystems. No one knows for certain how rising carbon dioxide levels and corresponding falling protein levels in plants will impact these species long term. Image by Edward Sanders courtesy of the Biodiversity Heritage LibraryNative bees, wasps, butterflies, moths, flies and other wild pollinators are vital to the world’s agriculture and to ecosystems. No one knows for certain how rising carbon dioxide levels and corresponding falling protein and mineral levels in plants will impact these species long term. Image by Edward Sanders courtesy of the Biodiversity Heritage Library


“[T]he issues are being discussed among international agriculture researchers, certainly,” continued Webb, who is also Director for USAID’s Feed the Future Nutrition Innovation Lab. “The challenge… is to document the pace of change [in plant nutritional value] for different regions of the world, for different kinds of crops. Only then will we know what kinds of policy changes need to be [put] in place to respond to what is happening (or not happening) at a scale significant enough to warrant action.”

Last year Myers and his colleagues looked at what projected declines in crop zinc content could mean for people in 188 countries. They found that under predicted increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide, 138 million more people would be at risk of zinc deficiency by 2050, largely concentrated in Africa and South Asia.

“The effect we have identified highlights an issue of social justice,” Myers and his co-authors wrote. “The wealthy world’s CO2 emissions are putting the poor in harm’s way.”

While the problem can theoretically be solved by identifying the regions and populations most at risk from hidden hunger, and then focusing mitigations such as mineral fortification programs there, logistical hurdles will likely prevent fortified foods from reaching everyone who need them, now and into the future, Loladze points out in his 2014 paper. Another option is to explore crop cultivars for selective breeding that may be less susceptible to nutrient declines under higher carbon dioxide levels.

Loladze also urges more research, asserting that a greater understanding of exactly how nutrient declines occur could be an important step in responding to their effects. “Elucidating the relative role of each mechanism — dilution [of nutrients] by carbohydrates, reduced transpiration, altered demands for nutrients and so on — and linking them to genomic changes will help us to develop mitigation strategies.”


Food chain and ecosystem changes


While the full impact on human health of hidden hunger is still being investigated, we’re not the only ones likely to be affected: as plants form the basis of most terrestrial ecosystems “changes in plant based nutrition will extend up to all feeding organisms as part of the food chain,” Lewis Ziska of the US Department of Agriculture told Mongabay.

“Generally this means that the vegetation [in a CO2 enriched environment] is of poorer quality for the animals consuming it — insect herbivores, deer, etc,” Elser explained. “However, this is not necessarily always the case. For example, lower nitrogen content in grass [a consequence of the carbohydrate dilution effect] has been shown to favor the success of locusts.”


A worker bee in a honeycomb. The serious decline of protein in goldenrod, an important fall crop that sustains North American bees through the winter, could be harming these pollinators, but more study is needed to separate out this particular dietary stressor from other major stressors including chemical pesticide use. How CO2 levels are impacting other pollen-providing plants and pollinators around the world has not been studied. Photo by Richard Bartz, Munich Makro Freak & Beemaster Hubert Seibring licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.5 Generic license
A worker bee in a honeycomb. The serious decline of protein in goldenrod, an important fall crop that sustains North American bees through the winter, could be harming these pollinators, but more study is needed to separate out this particular dietary stressor from other major stressors including chemical pesticide use. How CO2 levels are impacting other pollen-providing plants and pollinators around the world has not been studied. Photo by Richard Bartz, Munich Makro Freak & Beemaster Hubert Seibring licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.5 Generic license


Studies have shown that some insect herbivores can compensate for the less nutrient rich plants found in high CO2 environments by eating more, but their growth, development, and reproduction can be affected, Loladze said. Crop damage may also be higher if insects need to consume greater plant quantities to survive. Some laboratory studies have shown that even with compensatory feeding to make up for deficiencies, insects are more likely to starve to death, or could end up consuming damaging quantities of toxic compounds. In the wild, generalist species may respond by switching plant hosts, and over time evolutionary responses could be expected too.

Another ecosystem outcome is the lower nutrient content found in dead leaves, Elser added. “This can slow down the cycling of nutrients in soil and thus impact subsequent productivity of the grassland or forest.”

Research just published by Ziska and his colleagues illustrates another important way CO2 induced nutritional changes are likely impacting wild ecosystems and human food crops. His team examined Smithsonian National Museum specimens of the flowering plant goldenrod collected between 1824 and 2014, to see how pollen quality changed as atmospheric carbon dioxide levels rose — they saw a high correlation. As carbon dioxide concentrations rose from preindustrial levels of 280 parts per million to near current levels of 398 parts per million, the protein content in the most recent pollen samples fell by 30 percent. The greatest protein drop was seen between 1960 and 2014, when atmospheric CO2 levels rose most dramatically.


US Department of Agriculture Agricultural Research Service entomologist Dr. Jeff Pettis examines a bee colony in McFarland, CA in 2014. Bees are one of nature’s many pollinators and are crucial to the production for fruits and vegetables —including apples, squash and almonds. Honeybees are responsible for pollinating approximately $15 billion worth of US crops annually. Their disappearance would have massive repercussions for our food supply. Photo by David Kosling / USDA.
US Department of Agriculture Agricultural Research Service entomologist Dr. Jeff Pettis examines a bee colony in McFarland, CA in 2014. Bees are one of nature’s many pollinators and are crucial to the production for fruits and vegetables —including apples, squash and almonds. Honeybees are responsible for pollinating approximately $15 billion worth of US crops annually. Their disappearance would have massive repercussions for our food supply. Photo by David Kosling / USDA.


The team also ran a two-year experiment that grew goldenrod under an equivalent range of carbon dioxide concentrations, as well as at levels that are predicted for the coming decades. They observed similar protein declines.

Myers described these findings as “really fascinating,” and explained their significance: “This is important because goldenrod is one of the most ubiquitous late-blooming plants that provides fodder for bees before they overwinter.” Ziska and colleagues say that goldenrod is recognized as being “essential to native bee and honey bee health and winter survival”.

Not only is this likely to directly impact bee populations, “It is reasonable in the case of pollinators to suggest that reduced nutrition will increase vulnerability to other stressors; these other stressors could include things like neonics [pesticides] and/or invasives such as Varroa destructor [parasitic mites],” Ziska said. The loss of pollinators worldwide would drastically impact the many insect pollinated foods we enjoy today ranging from apples to oranges, almonds to cashews, cabbages to broccoli, coffee to tomatoes and blueberries.

“We are starting to design some experiments to see what these changes in protein content might mean for bee behavior and their effectiveness as pollinators,” Myers said. Research Myers and colleagues published last year quantified the role that pollinators play in ensuring human health via food nutrition. Their study concluded that without pollinators as many as 1.4 million additional people would die each year due to non-communicable diseases and micronutrient deficiencies.


The urgent need for research


The complexity of natural systems, and the numerous confounding factors that affect human health and animal health, make it difficult to foresee exactly how CO2 impacts on the food chain will play out for people or ecosystems. Mitigation strategies may be successful to a degree, once we know what we’re up against. Even better would be to rapidly cut fossil fuel emissions, making sure that long-term carbon dioxide increase predictions don’t materialize.

“The impact on the nutrition of our food is a direct effect of rising greenhouse gas emissions, so it is vital that we reduce these emissions,” Crimmins said. “Taking action on climate change now and reducing the world’s greenhouse gas emissions is not just an environmental imperative; it is crucial for protecting public health.”

“Bottom line is that humanity is operating like a monkey in a rocket ship,” Myers concluded. “We used to be passengers with all the other living creatures on the planet but we have climbed up into the cockpit and taken control. Now we are pushing buttons and flipping levers and rapidly changing most of the biophysical conditions on the planet with really very little idea what the consequences will be for our own health and wellbeing or that of the rest of the biosphere. Undoubtedly, there will be many more surprises along the way.”


A dwarf honey bee (Apis florea). The study of the impacts of carbon dioxide levels on plant nutrition has barely begun to be studied. As CO2 levels rise we are moving into uncharted territory. Photo by Gideon Pisanty (Gidip) licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported license


A dwarf honey bee (Apis florea). The impacts of carbon dioxide levels on plant nutrition has barely begun to be studied. As CO2 levels rise we are moving into uncharted territory. Photo by Gideon Pisanty (Gidip) licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported license




Citations


DeLucia, E.H., Nabity, P.D., Zavala, J.A., and Berenbaum, M.R. (2012) Climate Change: Resetting Plant-Insect Interactions. Plant Physiology 160: 1677-1685
Loladze, I. (2002) Rising atmospheric CO2 and human nutrition: toward globally imbalanced plant stoichiometry? Trends in Ecology and Evolution 17: 457-461
Loladze, I. (2014) Hidden shift of the ionome of plants exposed to elevated CO2 depletes minerals at the base of human nutrition. eLife 3:e02245. DOI: 10.7554/eLife.02245
Müller, C., Elliott, J., and Levermann, A. (2014) Fertilizing hidden hunger. Nature Climate Change 4: 540-541
Myers, S.S., Zanobetti, A., Kloog, I. et.al. (2014). Increasing CO2 threatens human nutrition. Nature 510: 139-142
Myers, S.S., Wessells, K.R., Kloog, I., Zanobetti, A., and Schwartz, J. (2015) Effect of increased concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide on the global threat of zinc deficiency: a modelling study. Lancet Global Health 3: e639-e645
Smith, M.R., Singh, G.M., Mozaffarian, D., and Myers, S.S. (2015) Effects of decreases of animal pollinators on human nutrition and global health: a modelling analysis. The Lancet 386: 1964-1972
Ziska, L., Crimmins, A., Auclair, A., DeGrasse, S., Garofalo, J.F., Khan, A.S., Loladze, I., Pérez de León, A.A., A. Showler, J. Thurston, and I. Walls, (2016) Ch. 7: Food Safety, Nutrition, and Distribution. The Impacts of Climate Change on Human Health in the United States: A Scientific Assessment. U.S. Global Change Research Program, Washington, DC, 189–216. http://dx.doi.org/10.7930/J0ZP4417
Ziska, L.H., Pettis, J.S., Edwards, J., Hancock, J.E., Tomecek, M.B., Clark, A., Dukes, J.S., Loladze, I. and Polley, H.W. (2016) Rising atmospheric CO2 is reducing the protein concentration of a floral pollen source essential for North American bees. Proc. R. Soc. B. 283: 20160414
Article published by Glenn Scherer




For more information about climate change see http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com/search/label/climate%20change  
- Scroll down through ‘Older Posts’ at the end of each section


Do you LIKE this uniquely informative site?
Hours of effort by a genuinely incapacitated invalid are required every day to maintain, write, edit, research, illustrate, moderate and publish this website from a tiny cabin in a remote forest.
Now that most people use ad blockers and view these posts on phones and other mobile devices, sites like this earn an ever shrinking pittance from advertising sponsorship. This site needs your help.
Like what you see? Please give anything you can -  
Contribute any amount and receive at least one New Illuminati eBook!
(You can use a card securely if you don’t use Paypal)
Please click below -




Spare Bitcoin change?


And it costs nothing to share this post on Social Media!
Dare to care and share - YOU are our only advertisement!



For further enlightening information enter a word or phrase into the random synchronistic search box @ the top left of http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com


And see


 New Illuminati on Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/the.new.illuminati

New Illuminati Youtube Channel -  https://www.youtube.com/user/newilluminati/playlists

New Illuminati’s OWN Youtube Videos -  
New Illuminati on Google+ @ For New Illuminati posts - https://plus.google.com/u/0/+RamAyana0/posts

New Illuminati on Twitter @ www.twitter.com/new_illuminati


New Illuminations –Art(icles) by R. Ayana @ http://newilluminations.blogspot.com

The Her(m)etic Hermit - http://hermetic.blog.com



DISGRUNTLED SITE ADMINS PLEASE NOTE –
We provide a live link to your original material on your site (and links via social networking services) - which raises your ranking on search engines and helps spread your info further!

This site is published under Creative Commons (Attribution) CopyRIGHT (unless an individual article or other item is declared otherwise by the copyright holder). Reproduction for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged - if you give attribution to the work & author and include all links in the original (along with this or a similar notice).

Feel free to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or mirror sites - you never know how long something will stay glued to the web – but remember attribution!

If you like what you see, please send a donation (no amount is too small or too large) or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…

Live long and prosper! Together we can create the best of all possible worlds…


From the New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com

Tuesday, 28 June 2016

5 Ways Vegetarianism Could Save the World


5 Ways Vegetarianism Could Save the World
5 Buddhist Teachings and Teachers Recommending a Vegetarian Lifestyle;
5 Reasons it’s the Ethical Thing to Do



According to scientific consensus, animals are sentient and feel emotions. This chick is a little happier than the one in the chicken factory farm depicted below.
According to scientific consensus, animals are sentient and feel emotions. This duck is a little happier than the birds in the chicken factory farm depicted below.



Not all Buddhists are vegetarians. Did the Buddha actually suggest a vegan lifestyle? And, putting aside Buddhists, why is the meat industry growing when the science says it’s hurting our planet? These are the questions that frame our special feature focusing on Vegetarianism: five ways it could save the world, five Buddhist teachings that recommended veganism, and five reasons it’s just the ethical thing to do. And, since not everyone reading this feature is a Buddhist, let’s start with the science.

The Scientific Buddhist Buddha Weekly Special Report
Over 56 billion farmed animals are killed each year by humans — 10 billion land animals in the U.S. alone. 3,000 die each second. [5] This does not include countless fish. Billions of animals suffer and die painfully — animals who, according to scientists, are sentient and feel emotions. [4]. Put another way, each person who eats meat, is directly responsible for the lives of an average of 95 slaughtered animals each year. [5]


According to most scientists, animals are sentient and feel emotions. Contrast this happy pig to the unhappy pigs on a factory farm below.
According to most scientists, animals are sentient and feel emotions. Contrast this happy pig to the unhappy pigs on a factory farm below.


The Scientific Buddhist, 5 Ways Vegetarianism Could Save the Planet


The data and science do suggest vegetarianism could indeed save the world. There’s a big “ism” in this statement. The only way vegetarianism could help save the world is if at least 25 percent of us stopped eating our earthly companions — non-human sentient beings. How is it possible that simply reducing demand for meat could save the planet? The most compelling reasons include:

  • emissions — the meat industry is one of our largest polluters, more than all cars and planes put together [1]
  • scarcity of land — 30% of the available ice-free surface area of the planet is now used by livestock, estimated to soon increase to 45%
  • inability to feed our population: perhaps more urgent than the environment is our inability to currently feed the world’s population, in part due to the unbalanced allocation of land: meat production uses 23 times as much land as crop production.
  • overuse of important resources such as water — and pollution of water.

Reduction in demand for meat by any sizeable percentage, would ease many of the issues and pressures identified by experts.


Demand for meat around the world is growing, with over 56 billion animals slaughtered each year, increasingly from factory farms who are major polluters.
Demand for meat around the world is growing, with over 56 billion animals slaughtered each year, increasingly from factory farms who are major polluters.


If we’re serious about global warming and the environment, even modest reductions in dependence on meat will have a higher impact on the environment than things such as emissions controls on automobiles.

That restaurant steak on the plate could represent 9,000 liters of water, 40 kilograms of poop (waste), 4 kilograms of feed and more emissions pollution than a car might create on an hour-long drive to the restaurant.


Animals are Sentient and Feel Emotions say Prominent Scientists


Science also supports the view that animals are sentient, which makes the ethical arguments all the more compelling. “A prominent international group of cognitive neuroscientists and other experts made a strong declaration, endorsed by Stephen Hawking, affirming that all “nonhuman animals… including octopuses” are sentient and feel emotions such as fear and happiness. We wrote about this in a popular Buddha Weekly feature: “Prominent scientists declare “All non human animals … are conscious beings.” (View here>>)

We challenged readers: “The advance in non-human rights begs the question, from a Mahayana Buddhist perspective, when we promise to liberate all sentient beings — or not to kill — just who do we include? If our definition includes all beings down to insects and octopuses, how do we reconcile our dependence on “lower” beings for survival?”


His Holiness the Gwalwang Karmapa is a vegetarian and recommends the lifestyle to Mahayana Buddhists.
His Holiness the Gwalwang Karmapa is a vegetarian and recommends the lifestyle to Mahayana Buddhists.


The 17th Gyalwang Karmapa gives a very direct answer: “We say I am going to do everything I can to free sentient beings from suffering. We say I am going to do this. We make the commitment. We take the vow. Once we have taken this vow, if then, without thinking anything about it, we just go ahead and eat meat, then that is not okay. It is something that we need to think about very carefully.”[3] The Dalai Lama also strongly recommends vegetarianism.


5 Ways Vegetarianism Could Save the World; 5 Buddhist Teachings and Teachers Recommending a Vegetarian Lifestyle; 5 Reasons it’s the Ethical Thing to Do



We asked Buddhist teacher Theodore Tsaousidis, of the Grey Bruce Mindfulness Centre, to put this in perspective. He didn’t sugar coat his view:

“If you claim to be a compassionate person or Buddhist in the 21st century and still eat meat, there are possible elements of pathology, hypocrisy and ignorance that beg reflection.”

But, before examining the ethics and Buddhist perspective, let’s start with five ways meat is damaging the environment and our world.


Meat consumption is growing in developing nations. There won't be enough land to support the growth. It is estimated 45% of non-ice land in the world will be used for meat production within a few years.
Meat consumption is growing in developing nations. There won’t be enough land to support the growth. It is estimated 45% of non-ice land in the world will be used for meat production within a few years.


Just the Facts: Why the Meat Industry is Damaging our Environment


The meat industry is one of the largest emissions contributors, producing more emissions than all the automobiles and planes put together. This issue will only be exacerbated by the expected growth of our population 4 billion. As a practical consideration, putting aside environment, ethics and all, there is not enough land to produce that much meat. It’s worth remembering that developing nations are quickly becoming advanced nations, increasing demand for meat.

There are some simple, largely indisputable, well-cited facts, that lead to the concept: “5 Ways Vegetarianism Can Save the Planet” story, only some of which we quote here (we recommend a read of the article of the same name in The Guardian>>)


Factory pig farm producing waste products. Unlike organic farms, large scale factory farms product more pollution than a small human city.
Factory pig farm producing waste products. Unlike organic farms, large scale factory farms product more pollution than a small human city.


Fact One — 18% of Global Climate Emissions are a result of meat production, more if you include supporting factors [1]

 

Factory farming is responsible for 37% of all methane emissions “which has 20 times the global warming potential of CO2.”[6]

“We humans eat about 230m tonnes of animals a year, twice as much as we did 30 years ago,” according to The Guardian newspaper. “We mostly breed four species – chickens, cows, sheep and pigs – all of which need vast amounts of food and water, emit methane and other greenhouse gases and produce mountains of physical waste… UN calculated that the climate change emissions of animals bred for their meat was… more than cars, planes and all other forms of transport put together.”


The meat industry is currently the largest methane producer, and the biggest contributor to pollution and global warming.
The meat industry is currently the largest methane producer, and the biggest contributor to pollution and global warming.


World Bank Scientists pegged the number at much higher, because they include extra considerations like clear-cutting oxygen producing forests to favor animal agriculture, fertilizers and many other factors, such as transport, bringing the total up to 51%.

In other words, if only 25% of the world’s population converted to vegetarianism, the impact on the environment would be staggering. That’s a fact, not even arguable (although certainly some will try. Which brings us to fact Two — the population is increasing.


Increasing wildfires and turbulent weather are two of the consequences of global warming.
Increasing wildfires and turbulent weather are two of the consequences of global warming.


Fact Two — It takes 23X as much land to grow our vegetables as to raise meat livestock — not enough land to feed the expected increase in world populations.

 

Currently, according to facts cited in the Guardian feature: “Nearly 30% of the available ice-free surface area of the planet is now used by livestock, or for growing food for those animals. One billion people go hungry every day, but livestock now consumes the majority of the world’s crops.”

In other words, when the population grows by only 3 billion, we’ll need to consume another 15% — assuming demand per person doesn’t increase as nations grow richer—and we’ll have another 500 million starving humans. For livestock, 45% of land in the world — and unlikely possibility, even if we clear cut the few remaining forests (which leads us to the third fact — deforestation). Not all land is suitable for livestock. Of course, speaking facetiously, if the polar icecaps keep melting we may have more land for meat.


Factory farming requires extensive land, water and natural resources.
Factory farming requires extensive land, water and natural resources.


Put another way, in the US. alone, 13m hectares of land are used to grow vegetables, while it takes nearly 23 times that much, 302m hectares for livestock. “The problem is that farm animals are inefficient converters of food to flesh,” writes the Guardian. For example, pigs need 8.4kg of feed to produce one kilogram of meat.

Fact Three — Millions of hectares of trees cut to produce burgers

 

Agriculture in general is causing deforestation, mostly for meat and a few crops such as palm oil and soya. Write the Guardian: “Millions of hectares of trees have been felled to provide burgers for the US and more recently animal feed for farms for Europe, China and Japan.” 6m hectares of forest land a year are lost (roughly twice the size of Belgium) with most converted to farmland. Putting aside the destruction of animal habitat there’s an enormous climate cost. The second largest crop to go on that clear-cut land is soybeans, mostly grown to feed the cattle.


Clear cutting is necessary to create more land for meat production. Currently, 36% of non-ice land in the world is used in meat production, expected to grow to 45%.
Clear cutting is necessary to create more land for meat production. Currently, 36% of non-ice land in the world is used in meat production, expected to grow to 45%.


Fact Four — A single cow farm can generate as much waste as a small city

 

The Guardian: ” Industrial-scale agriculture now dominates the western livestock and poultry industries, and a single farm can now generate as much waste as a city. A cow excretes around 40kg of manure for every kilogram of edible beef it puts on and when you have many thousands crowded into a small area the effect can be dramatic. Their manure and urine is funneled into massive waste lagoons sometimes holding as many as 40m gallons.”


Using arable land for crops versus meat production could have more impact on global warming than emission controls on factories and cars.
Using arable land for crops versus meat production could have more impact on global warming than emission controls on factories and cars.


The article goes on to present shocking pollution statistics, such as “most summers between 13,000 and 20,000 sq km of the sea at the mouth of the Mississippi becomes a “dead zone”, caused when vast quantities of excess nutrients from animal waste, factory farms, sewage, nitrogen compounds and fertilizer are swept down the might river.” There are nearly 400 dead zones that have been identified, largely due to animal farming.

Fact Five: Current meat animals drink too much: producing a pound of beef requires 9,0000 litres of water

 

It may not be a top of mind issue in North America, where water is somewhat plentiful, if polluted. But in most other parts of the world, water shortage and clean water is a serious, even life-threatening issue.

It requires approximately 9,000 litres of water (20,000 pounds) to produce one pound of beef, 1,000 litres to produce one litre of milk. A broiler chicken “only” consumes 1,500 litres. Pigs are the worst, with the largest pig farms consuming as much water as a normal-sized human city.


Indicated on map are areas of the world with not enough water for survival. Meat production uses a disproportionate amount of precious water resources and contributes to the pollution of remaining water.
Indicated on map are areas of the world with not enough water for survival. Meat production uses a disproportionate amount of precious water resources and contributes to the pollution of remaining water.


There is no doubt that farming consumes the majority of our water, 70% according to expert estimations, but this number could be dramatically reduced if we transitioned more food output to crops versus meat.

For instance, potatoes take between 60 and 229 pounds of water per pound of produce — as compared to 20,000 pounds of water for a pound of beef. [1]


Cows feel emotions, according to the majority of scientists. A glance at this happy cow reinforces this fact.
Cows feel emotions, according to the majority of scientists. A glance at this happy cow reinforces this fact.


Bottom Line — Meat a higher negative impact on the environment as compared to other major industries.

 

If we put aside ethical and Buddhist arguments, the meat industry is harmful to our collective help. Even a modest decrease in demand for meat can result in positive environmental returns. Significant decreases in demand could, literally, save our planet.


5 Buddhist Teachings and Teachers Recommending Vegetarian Lifestyle


Science not only proves horrendous impact of the meat industry on climate change and our environment, it asserts rather forcefully that even fairly simple non-human animals and birds — including fish — are sentient and have emotions. Both positions might be debatable, but these facts are credibly established. Which returns us to ethics and Buddhist teachings, since helping sentient beings is one of the most important compassion foundations of Mahayana Buddhism.


This annual vegetarian festival in Thailand celebrates the good karma of a non-meat lifestyle.
This annual vegetarian festival in Thailand celebrates the good karma of a non-meat lifestyle.


Earlier, we stated the strong position of Buddhist teacher Theodore Tsaousidis: “If you claim to be a compassionate person or Buddhist in the 21st century and still eat meat, there are possible elements of pathology, hypocrisy and ignorance that beg reflection.”

Is this harsh? Not if you consider the First Precept of the Buddha, “Abstain from Taking Life.” And not, as Mahayana Buddhists, when we vow to “benefit all sentient beings.” Practicing Mahayana Buddhists reinforce that vow and belief each day when we take refuge.

Theodore elaborated on his very strong position:

“If one keeps looking to the Buddha for direction as to whether it is permissible to kill and eat animals, then one doesn’t understand the aim of his teachings. If you, on a basic level, understand the fundamental technology and methodology of Buddhist’s teachings, then whether the question is simple or complex, it can be answered strictly by applying the method the Buddha expounded —which is to ask the question and experience the answer for oneself. 

“To do this, one must attend to one’s raw feeling. Without getting entangled in the interpretation of various sources, we can just feel and attend to one question: “Is my action inclusively wholesome, good, compassionate and freeing?” 


Theodore Tsaousidis is a meditation teacher who lectures regularly at Gaden Choling Toronto and a Medicine Buddha Toronto events and retreats.
Theodore Tsaousidis is a meditation teacher from Grey Bruce Mindfulness Centre, who lectures regularly at Gaden Choling Toronto and a Medicine Buddha Toronto events and retreats.


Science asserts that sentient beings include fish, birds and animals. Buddhism might be the middle way, but there is really not much middle ground for a Mahayana Buddhist with regards to eating meat. In Theravadan Buddhism, perhaps, there’s a little leeway, but the Mahayana Buddhist is above all compassionate and working for the benefit of sentient beings.


“If I didn’t ask the butcher to kill the animal, meat is okay, right?”

 

Generally, early Buddhist monks were instructed by Buddha to eat whatever is given to them. This could include meat, provided they were certain that the animal was not butchered for their benefit. Which, of course, is a wide loop hole, if you consider this to mean “it’s okay as long as I didn’t instruct them to butcher the meat.” However, most reasonable people understand that meat is only butchered due to our demand, so we are all involved in the decision.


Buddha taught the precept to "abstain from taking life." This is defined as any breathing life form.
Buddha taught the precept to “abstain from taking life.” This is defined as any breathing life form.


Specifically, Buddha said, in early Theravadan sutras: “Monks, I allow you fish and meat that are quite pure in three respects: if they are not seen, heard or suspected to have been killed on purpose for a monk. But, you should not knowingly make use of meat killed on purpose for you.” In this case, Buddha is teaching that monks should not reject alms, and also it’s important not to waste meat that is already butchered. Generally, this is not interpreted to mean approval of the practice of eating meat itself.


The hamburger factor. Countless hectares of forest is cleared each year to support the growing popularity of the hamburger.
The hamburger factor. Countless hectares of forest are cleared each year to support the growing popularity of the hamburger.


Technically correct? No intention is a thin argument.

 


It came down to intention. If monks were given meat, they could eat it because they had no intention to do harm (it was given to them, not requested by them) — therefore there was no negative karma. That’s not saying there was no harm done, only that there is no specific ethical problem if there was no intention to harm. It’s a thin argument, perhaps, considering there is knowledge that harm was done, but it’s technically correct in terms of karma.


Animals feel emotions.
Animals feel emotions.


However, since most of us are lay practitioners, we more or less order or buy meat knowing it must be killed for our benefit. Therefore, our middle ground becomes one of — “I’m not ready to be a monk today, but sometime in the future…” If we really want to look the other way, we can also hide behind “no intention to cause harm” but it’s not an easy argument to make when we knowingly buy the meat.


Sentient animals around the world feel happiness, pain and suffering. Here are two happy friends.
Sentient animals around the world feel happiness, pain and suffering. Here are two happy friends.


Mahayana sutras, on the other hand, for the most part reject meat and emphasize compassion to all sentient beings — which we now know include non-human animals, birds and fish.

 

The Dalai Lama: “The best thing is to give up meat.”

 

 

In answer to the direct question, “Is it permissible for Buddhists to eat meat?” the Dalai Lama replied in November 2009:

“The best thing is to give up meat entirely. Sometimes one’s lifestyle and circumstances provide no alternative but to eat meat, and in these cases one should eat as little meat as possible. Tibetan monasteries and nunneries in south India became entirely vegetarian 15 years ago. Festivals and ceremonies in all Tibetan monasteries and nunneries should be completely vegetarian.” [3]


The Dalai Lama often teaches the topic of meditation on death and wrote books on the topic.
The Dalai Lama often teaches the benefits of vegetarianism, or minimizing the consumption of meat.


His Holiness 17th Gyalwang Karmapa: Doesn’t eat meat because “of the intense suffering that the animals”

 


The Gyalwang Karmapa, who is a vegetarian, gave two reasons why he suggests not eating meat (on the official website of the Karmapa): The first reason is the intense suffering that the animals who are killed go through. Every single day millions of animals are killed to feed us, and many are subjected to terrible conditions to provide us with food.”

The second reason is even more directly hard-hitting from a Mahayana Buddhist point of view:

“We say I am going to do everything I can to free sentient beings from suffering. We say I am going to do this. We make the commitment. We take the vow. Once we have taken this vow, if then, without thinking anything about it, we just go ahead and eat meat, then that is not okay. It is something that we need to think about very carefully.”


The most Venerable Thich Nhat Hanh.
The most Venerable Thich Nhat Hanh advocates not only vegetarianism, but activism.


What five other notable Buddhist teachers say about eating meat


Here are a few snippets (there are thousands to choose from) from the great teachers:

    What the Buddhist Teachers Say Buddha Weekly
  • Bikkhu Bodhi: The first precept, to abstain from killing, includes the “taking of life of ay being with breath.”
  • Zasep Tulku Rinpoche: “We must not hurt other people and animals.”
  • Thich Nhat Hanh: “No killing can be justified…. We must also learn way to prevent others from killing.”
  • Kyabje Chatral Sangye Dorje Rinpoche: “Meat, the sinful food.”
  • Lama Zopa Rinpoche: ” As there are more and more people becoming vegetarian, that means less and less animals will be killed. So it is very important. In the world people eat meat mainly because of habit; so many people have not thought that the animals experience unbelievable suffering.” [4]


The most Venerable Zasep Tulku Rinpoche teaching at Dorje Ling. Rinpoche often teaches on "death meditation" and "Powa Practice."
The most Venerable Zasep Tulku Rinpoche teaches “we must not hurt other people and animals.”


5 reasons becoming a vegetarian is the ethical thing to do


Some might say we should have started here — with the ethics of meat. In general, most non-sadistic people understand animals suffer. Culturally, we are brought up to accept the practice as “survival” even after it has been demonstrated that vegetarianism is healthier and less expensive.


Factory meat farming produces more methane and green house gases than any other industry.
Factory meat farming produces more methane and greenhouse gases than any other industry.


The root of “immorality” of meat eating lies in two premises, backed by science:

  • that animals are sentient, suffer and feel emotions

  • that the meat industry is unhealthy for our planet.


Happy vegetarians.
Happy vegetarians.


If those are accepted, practicing Mahayana Buddhists should, according to many Buddhist teachers, include meat animals in vow “to free all sentient beings from suffering.” The greater threat — that of the world slowly eaten away by an environmentally dangerous meat industry —also can’t be ignored as explicit in that vow. Suffering is suffering. Sentience is sentience. And each person who becomes a vegetarian saves an average of 95 animals each year. [5]


The environmental consequences of excessive meat production will be felt even in the short term.
The environmental consequences of excessive meat production will be felt even in the short term.


The 5 reasons to abstain or cut back on meat eating are simple:

1.    Danger to he environment: the meat industry is one of the world’s greatest threats to the environment in terms of pollution, land and resource consumption, and global warming.
2.    Suffering: Eating animals increases demand for slaughter (approximately 95 animals per year per person), which creates the suffering of billions of sentient beings, all of whom feel emotions.
3.    Scarcity of food: Since meat animals require approximately 23 times more land than equivalent plant crops, dedicating so much land, water and resources to meat animals, makes it difficult to raise enough food for our current world population
4.    Buddhist teachings: Abstain from taking life, defined as any breathing animal, and having compassion for any sentient being.
5.    Economy: As land and resources dwindle, and population grows, meat will become unaffordable, creating inequities around the world.


Even fish feel emotions, according to scientists.
Even fish feel emotions, according to scientists.


NOTES

[1] The Guardian: “Five Reasons Vegetarians Can Save the World.”
[2] Interview with Theodore Tsaousidis, Buddha Weekly
[3] “Dear Dalai Lama: Is it Permissible for Buddhists to eat meat?” Elephant Journal 
[4] Sources of these quotes found in the Buddha Weekly feature, ” Prominent Scientists Declare “All Non Human Animals… Are Conscious Beings.” The Dalai Lama Protests Chicken Slaughter. An Orangutan Won Non-Human Rights Over Zoo Keeper. What Do the Teachers Say About Non-Human Compassion?”
[5] Animal Equality.




For more information about vegetarianism see http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com/search/label/vegetarianism  
- Scroll down through ‘Older Posts’ at the end of each section


Do you LIKE this uniquely informative site?
Hours of effort by a genuinely incapacitated invalid are required every day to maintain, write, edit, research, illustrate, moderate and publish this website from a tiny cabin in a remote forest.
Now that most people use ad blockers and view these posts on phones and other mobile devices, sites like this earn an ever shrinking pittance from advertising sponsorship. This site needs your help.
Like what you see? Please give anything you can -  
Contribute any amount and receive at least one New Illuminati eBook!
(You can use a card securely if you don’t use Paypal)
Please click below -




Spare Bitcoin change?


And it costs nothing to share this post on Social Media!
Dare to care and share - YOU are our only advertisement!




For further enlightening information enter a word or phrase into the random synchronistic search box @ the top left of http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com


And see


 New Illuminati on Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/the.new.illuminati

New Illuminati Youtube Channel -  https://www.youtube.com/user/newilluminati/playlists

New Illuminati’s OWN Youtube Videos -  
New Illuminati on Google+ @ For New Illuminati posts - https://plus.google.com/u/0/+RamAyana0/posts

New Illuminati on Twitter @ www.twitter.com/new_illuminati


New Illuminations –Art(icles) by R. Ayana @ http://newilluminations.blogspot.com

The Her(m)etic Hermit - http://hermetic.blog.com



DISGRUNTLED SITE ADMINS PLEASE NOTE –
We provide a live link to your original material on your site (and links via social networking services) - which raises your ranking on search engines and helps spread your info further!

This site is published under Creative Commons (Attribution) CopyRIGHT (unless an individual article or other item is declared otherwise by the copyright holder). Reproduction for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged - if you give attribution to the work & author and include all links in the original (along with this or a similar notice).

Feel free to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or mirror sites - you never know how long something will stay glued to the web – but remember attribution!

If you like what you see, please send a donation (no amount is too small or too large) or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…

Live long and prosper! Together we can create the best of all possible worlds…


From the New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com