Dairy's climate dilemma

Being able to digest milk as an adult human isn’t all that normal as one might think. Estimates suggest somewhat less than 40 percent of people in the world retain the ability to digest lactose after childhood. Researchers have discovered that with the advent of agriculture more than 7,000 years ago, human beings in certain regions underwent a genetic mutation that allowed them to stay milk drinkers into adulthood. But in many parts of the world, lactose intolerance in adults remains widespread.

Milk has an overwhelmingly positive image in many parts of the world – it’s considered healthy and nutritious and a must-have for building strong bodies. But milk consumption creates all sorts of problems for the environment. Dairy livestock breeding has become increasingly difficult as global temperatures continue to rise. And according to a study by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the dairy industry accounts for four percent of the world’s carbon dioxide emissions.

GLOBAL IDEAS spoke to Gerhard Flachowsky, former director of the Institute of Animal Nutrition in Braunschweig in Germany about whether and how we can switch our eating habits to curb the problem.

GLOBAL IDEAS: Are dairy products necessary for a balanced diet?

Gerhard Flachowsky: Food products of animal origin such as meat, milk or eggs are not essential for our nutrition as vegans around the world have proven. However, it is important to supplement a plant-based diet with essential amino acids, trace elements and vitamins. It’s recommended that we cover a third of our protein needs from animal-based products. And I believe that recommendation is especially significant in developing countries because an optimal supplementation of a vegan diet is incredibly difficult in those areas, if not impossible. The recommendation is especially important for pregnant or breast-feeding mothers as well as for infants, children and teenagers.

Is it actually environmentally-sustainable to drink milk? And what effect does the dairy industry have on climate change?

Milk for human consumption primarily comes from ruminant animals such as cows, sheep, goats, and even camels. Ruminant animals have a very particular system of digestion, where special microorganisms work to break down various nutrients until they can actually be utilized. But that process also generates a significant amount of methane, a greenhouse gas, in the rumen, or paunch of the animal. Methane is considered 23 times more damaging to the environment than carbon dioxide. So, the ruminant animals are considered a huge climate-killer. There have been varying efforts to stem the methane by-product, but with limited success. Methane has a massive carbon footprint. When it comes to products from ruminant animals, 50 to 80 percent of the carbon footprint produced can be traced to methane.

There have been attempts to make ruminant animals produce less methane, like giving cows a bacteria vaccine or special methane-reducing feed. But experts believe the methods are unrealistic.

Any effort to alter the complex bacterial cocktail that generates fermentation in a cow’s stomach is a difficult undertaking at best. The animals themselves are powerless to stop the production of methane in their digestive tracts, but there are some promising alternatives. In the US, the department of agriculture is helping farmers purchase bio converters which transform cow dung into clean electricity.

Does it make sense to switch to milk from other animals such as goats or camels? Or do products such as tofu or oat milk offer a solution to the problem?

Goat milk has just as big a carbon footprint as cow’s milk. Goats are considered the locusts among grazing animals because their pasturing habits can significantly contribute towards reducing the quality of the soil. Sheep milk production is likely to be even more detrimental than goat milk, and there has been little research into camel milk’s carbon footprint. Attempts to imitate foodstuff like using soya milk or “meat” from plant-based protein are relatively old, dating back to the middle of the last century. Unfortunately they haven’t led to any significant breakthroughs through. At the moment, there is no widespread acceptance for replacing animal products with plant-based “imitation” proteins. There is certainly a great need for more research.

Soy products too are not without fault when it comes to CO2 emissions. After harvest, the soybean stalks left behind often biodegrade and produce nitrous oxide – a gas that is 300 times worse for the climate than CO2. What’s more, vast swathes of forest land are often razed to make way for soybean plantations, devastating important ecosystems. Experts from the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute in Panama say in Brazil’s Amazon basin alone, around half a million hectares of rainforest land are lost to soy production every year. That translates to the release of around 100 million tons of CO2 annually into the atmosphere. So whether it’s a steak or a veggie burger, relying on local or regional products is almost always the most climate-friendly option.

How will climate change affect the dairy industry in the coming decades? What can the industry do to adapt?

Rising temperatures, volatile weather patterns and higher concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere make it necessary that we find a better system of stockpiling animal feed. Fodder plants become woody much quicker, which also makes them difficult to digest. The rising temperatures will soon mean that we will need to keep animals and stables cool during heat waves. And we will also see new diseases among plants and animals. On the other hand, we can also expect better yields from certain plants if sufficient water is available, certain types of plants and plant nutrients are available and if the use of CO2, which is available in vast quantities in the atmosphere, is optimized.

And what needs to be done in the agricultural industry to adapt to the changes?

The most sustainable efforts to adapt involve special breeding processes – such as breeding crop varieties for low-input agriculture, which guarantees a high and stable yield. In addition to that, the relationship between dietary nutrients and an animal’s performance has to be improved so we can slash the amount of emissions produced. In a very practical sense that means improving performance and reducing the number of animals needed. There are several research groups working on that concept right now. But the current livestock system has been around for centuries, and we shouldn’t expect any miracle solutions overnight.

Interview conducted by Wiebke Feuersenger/ss
Editor: Sonia Phalnikar