ATLANTA — Sustainability and climate change have long been on the minds of consumers. Deep concern for the environment has led manufacturers to try to improve their environmental efforts, all hoping to reduce their impact.
For the pet food and treatment industry, environmental concerns have led to increased interest in the wider use of eco-friendly packaging, the development of alternative protein ingredients, and the promotion of more sustainable operations. of the facility.
Frank Mitloehner, professor and air quality specialist at UC Davis and Director of the Department of Animal Science at the CLEAR Center.
| Source: Sosland Publishing Co. / Nicole KerwinAlthough these efforts are good, understanding the true environmental impact of the industry is necessary, especially as consumers draw – and implement – their own conclusions. Frank Mitloehner, professor and air quality specialist at UC Davis and Department of Animal Science Director at the CLEAR Center, discussed this topic at the American Feed Industry Association’s 2024 Pet Food Conference on Jan. 30.
Real effects
According to the peer-reviewed article “Environmental impacts of food consumption by dogs and cats” by Gregory S. Okin that appeared in PLOS One, 163 million dogs and cats in the United States are responsible for 25% to 30% of the environmental impact . of meat consumption. Additionally, these livestock create approximately 64 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) annually from meat consumption.
These statistics remain a major concern for pet parents today, many of whom demonize the meat processing and agricultural industries for their significant detrimental impact on the environment.
Many alternative meat companies have cropped up to provide more eco-friendly protein sources for use in animal nutrition and pet food, but such products are not a complete sustainability solution, as of presented at the Mitloehner’s Pet Food Conference presentation.
According to Mitloehner, US animal agriculture emissions represent only a small portion of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In 2017, these emissions amounted to 49 billion tons, representing only 0.5% of global GHGs, while US plant agriculture emissions represented 0.6%, US fossil fuel combustion emissions represented 11%, and all other US and global GHG emissions account for 88%, according to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory.
Additionally, in 2022, when US GHG emissions reach approximately 5.98 billion tons, the agricultural industry accounts for 11% of these emissions, while other industries such as transportation and electric power accounts for a larger share of GHG emissions, according to the US EPA 2022 Inventory of US Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks.
Source: ©JONATAN RUNDBLAD – STOCK.ADOBE.COMThe main greenhouse gases that have the potential for global warming are carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide. Cattle are considered significant CO2 emitters by consumers, when the truth is that these animals help with carbon sequestration. Through this process, carbon in plants and the air is consumed by a cow and eventually released as waste, which eventually circulates through the soil and back into the plants. Carbon is also produced as a result of agricultural production, where meat and milk are industrial sources.
Looking at methane emissions, the agricultural industry is estimated to account for about 188 million tons annually of the global 558 million tons, according to the Global Carbon Project. However, the total sinks that naturally absorb methane from the atmosphere are estimated to be about 548 million tons, meaning that only about 10 million tons of methane will be released annually.
Although this amount of methane is smaller than commonly believed, methane still contributes to global warming and leaves a significant impact on the environment. According to Mitloehner, this does not mean reducing the amount or reliance on livestock, but better management of cattle methane emissions could be part of the climate solution.
A multi-faceted solution
As the global population continues to increase, more and more developing countries are entering the globe. These countries carry larger population growth rates and rely on large numbers of livestock to feed their populations.
The problem with livestock in developing countries is that production is not as efficient as in more industrialized countries. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), GHG emissions from milk production in various developing regions, including Central and South America, West Asia and Northern Africa, Sub Saharan Africa, and South Asia, is larger than those from North America, Western and Eastern Europe, Russia, East Asia, and Oceania regions.
Improving livestock production can help solve this problem. As Mitloehner has shown, when milk production from a cow increases, GHG emissions tend to decrease.
Instead of trying to limit animal populations in developing countries, several interventions can be made to help ensure that these animals produce meat and milk more efficiently. According to Mitloehner, things like improving animal fertility, health and genetics can help reduce the number of animals needed for agricultural production. Developing more energy-dense feed can also help by lowering methane emissions per animal.
According to the FAO, the projected emissions from the agricultural industry for 2050 are estimated to be around 9.06 million tons of CO2 equivalent, but increasing livestock productivity could help reduce these projected emissions by 20% by 2050.
Source: The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, “Pathways to lower emissions”
Although meat-free Mondays and vegan diets for humans, as well as for pets, have become popular with consumers as ways to help fight climate change, this change in diet is not the best solution. According to research shared by Mitloehner, people who change their diet from omnivore to vegan are estimated to save about 0.8 tons of CO2e annually, and people who commit to meat-free Mondays are estimated to will reduce GHG emissions by 0.3%. For reference, a trans-Atlantic flight per person contributes 1.6 tons of CO2e.
Instead of looking at protein consumption, the focus should be on wasted food. In addition to focusing efforts on improving livestock production, Mitloehner also urged that climate efforts focus on food waste. An estimated 40% of food in the United States is wasted, and globally, people waste one out of every three calories, according to Mitloehner.
Some in the pet food industry have already seen the potential in food waste, using upcycled ingredients in their formulas and thereby reducing some of the food waste that contributes to emissions. But upcycling materials alone is only a small part of reducing emissions. Supporting the agricultural industry as it strives to shift to more efficient production will be key for the pet food industry as it seeks to reduce its environmental impact throughout the supply chain.
Read more coverage from 2024 Pet Food Conference.
