New York Times Columnist Mark Bittman: Eating Meat is Bad for the Environment

Mark Bittman is a New York Times columnist, food writer and winner of several prestigious cookbook awards. In a thought-provoking column for the New York Times, he recently explored the possible linkages between our consumption of meat and the resulting impact on the environment. As Bittman pointed out in Re-Thinking the Meat-Guzzler, there are disturbing parallels between the energy-industrial complex and the meat-industrial complex. In the Q&A below, he shares additional thoughts on meat consumption and its harmful effects on both health and the environment.

AWEARNESS: The title of your article ("Re-thinking the Meat Guzzler") was certainly provocative. Was your primary intention to get Americans to re-think their health habits or to raise greater awareness of how meat consumption is taking a heavy toll on the environment?

Mark Bittman: The title was none of my doing; I wish I were that clever! But both: it's become increasingly clear that meat raised in the way most of it is raised in the States, and consumed at the level we consume it, is not only bad for our bodies but also for the environment. Check out Livestock's Long Shadow, the FAO report.

AWEARNESS: In your article, you mention an interesting statistic: "If Americans were to reduce meat consumption by just 20% it would be as if we all switched from a standard sedan... to the ultra-efficient Prius." Do you think that individuals would be able to voluntarily achieve this goal - or that the U.S. government would need to introduce regulation?

Mark Bittman: The government will never do it; it's up to us. It might happen voluntarily: people will recognize that they'd be doing themselves, the animals, and the earth a favor by cutting back. Or it might happen because meat becomes prohibitively expensive.

AWEARNESS: With oil at $90-$100/barrel, the focus has obviously shifted to sources of alternative energy and everyday steps that Americans can take to reduce their carbon footprint. What happens if oil falls back to, say, $50/barrel - will the environmental movement be able to sustain its momentum?

Mark Bittman: Clearly more expensive oil makes alternatives economically feasible. But with oil as with meat, if the true environmental costs were included in the price - for example, if the cost of cleaning the Mississippi were included in the per-bushel cost of corn fed to animals - there would be no going back.

AWEARNESS: Other than cutting back on meat consumption, how can the average person help to dismantle the grain-meat-energy industrial triangle?

Mark Bittman: That would be plenty! Eating locally grown products would undoubtedly help, too. Having a better sense of what food truly costs and how important it is is the place to start.

AWEARNESS: Who are some of your personal role models?

Mark Bittman: Tough question. I could say "anyone who spends his or her life helping others." Or Frances Moore Lappe, who wrote Diet for a Small Planet. Then there are the great cooks and chefs who demonstrate daily that vegetables can be as enjoyable to eat as meat or fish.

New York Times Columnist Mark Bittman: Eating Meat is Bad for the Environment

Post a comment