There are certain topics of personal choice I rarely discuss. Not that I shy away from difficult questions. I have no fear of dinner table discourse, however what’s for supper is a topic in which I rarely engage in full discussion. You see, I haven’t eaten beef, poultry or ham (knowingly) in about eight years, which troubles some. When asked about my eating habits, I usually crack a joke about the diet and change the subject, as I have learned running the same debate can be tiresome and in poor taste. I get cranky around the point where the meat eater attempts gory descriptions to make me queasy. (Note: that doesn’t work. Bloody steak doesn’t disgust me.)

But given that so much discussion has centred on consumption and climate change recently, perhaps it’s time to weigh in. 

While I have concerns about animal rights, genetically modified products, factory farms and consumption, my decision to forego most meats has a great deal to do with (I can’t say no to seafood, so yes I empathize with those who can’t abandon their beloved steak) its effects upon climate continue to come up.

Given that climate change is identified as a destructive force that requires shifts in the way we live our lives, I’m troubled why one major source of emissions has remained unscathed.

Eating meat.

First, full disclosure. I have profited in the past from the beef and dairy industry in the past, so I’m well aware of the economic arguments for increased beef consumption. Livestock are costly to raise. Land, feed, shots, trucking, butcher fees, etc add up. I’ve also seen how increases in meat consumption (post-BSE) actually have less effect than expected for the actual farmer.

The problem is this.

Livestock produce a great deal of methane, which is one of the most damaging greenhouse gasses. It is estimated that livestock are responsible for 18 per cent of all greenhouse gasses, which is higher than the effects of transportation. The effects of methane are much greater than CO2, yet so much of the climate change has focussed on small changes - light bulbs, reducing idling, etc. Much of the beef Canadians consume comes from extremely large herds, as small and medium-sized operations take a backseat to cheaper factory farm operations.

But the dinner plate has remained untouched in the climate change debate.

There has been a greater emphasis on eating locally-produced products, with an eye on reducing transportation costs, yet once again the reduction in greenhouse gasses is small. Speaking strictly from a CO2 emissions standpoint, shipping thousands and thousands of tomatoes by ship and train from South America is only slightly better than running a truck back and forth from BC farms several times a week.

That being said, buying locally still supports local economies, provides a greater level of food security and allows for greater control of what is put in the food we eat.

So this week, I ask you to think about your dinner plate as well as your carbon footprint, and try -even for just one meal, to forgo meat.

Think of it as your effort to save the planet.