Germany: GreenPeace want to kill 75% of cows and people need eat insects
https://bit.ly/3d3M47V
A new study commissioned by the environmental organization
Greenpeace comes to the conclusion that if Germans were to
eat differently, up to 70 million additional people could be supplied
with food. The scenario also includes reducing the number of animals
by around 75 percent. In a new study for Greenpeace, the Oko-Institut
has worked out the consequences of a different diet that is classified
as healthy. In the summary of the study, Greenpeace lists only
positive effects. The organization also sees only advantages in the
75 percent reduction in animal population, which would go hand
in hand with a healthy diet for everyone in Germany. The change
in diet would free up 40 percent of arable land In addition to the
reduced number of livestock, the study assumes that the consumption
of animal-based foods is also declining in Germany. The Oko-Institut
uses the "Planetary Health Diet (PHD)" concept from the EAT Lancet
Commission as a guide. The Commission's report deals with ways to
achieve sustainable and healthy nutrition with a growing world
population. If the Commission's calculations are used as a basis,
Germans would have to reduce their consumption of animal-based
foods by 75 percent. According to the Oko-Institut, this would free
up 40 percent of the arable land because animal feed would no longer
have to be grown on it. Political goals, which initially lead to
a shortage of available arable land, have already been taken into
account here. This includes: the rewetting of 80 percent of the
moors, biodiversity areas on 10 percent of the arable and grassland,
30 percent organic farming. An increase in the self-sufficiency rates
for rapeseed, grain maize, forage legumes, legumes, soybeans (100
percent each) and vegetables (67 percent) was also assumed. This
results in an additional fertilizer requirement of 1.2 million tons
of CO2 equivalents.
Despite the inclusion of these factors, according to the calculations
of the Oko-Institut, 40 percent of the arable land would be available
for other uses. If food for export were grown on this land, it could
feed 70 million people. According to the study, if the areas were
forested, a carbon sink of around 20.4 million tons of CO2 could
be created within the next 23 years. At the same time, the change
in diet would save 75 percent of greenhouse gases from agriculture.
Overall, agriculture is responsible for 13 percent of greenhouse gas
emissions in Germany; 80 percent of this share is due to animal
husbandry.
From Greenpeace's point of view, the current per capita meat
consumption in Germany is far too high because it exacerbates the
climate crisis and is harmful to people's health. The Germans would
have to "feed themselves in a way that is healthy for them and the
planet". A change in diet reduces the risk of diabetes, colon cancer
and heart attacks, for example. "We are now demanding comprehensive
measures from politicians in order to achieve the goal of the
nutritional transition in the coming years. The official nutritional
recommendations need to be adjusted," says Martin Hofstetter,
agricultural expert at Greenpeace. Animal stocks should be reduced
and the environmental costs of milk and meat production should be
taken into account.
Unfortunately, the study only touches on what the extremely reduced
animal stocks would mean for agriculture. There it says in
conclusion: "The often quoted maxim of quality instead of quantity
will have a significant impact on value creation in rural areas and
jobs in agriculture, but could also bring enormous advantages at the
same time." How the reduction in animal husbandry can be socially
cushioned could be one of several unresolved questions for which
there is a short-term need for research and clarification.
