California’s cattle ranchers contribute a significant amount to the region’s culture, economy and food supply, but do they also inadvertently help to temper the wildfires that have been plaguing the state? And if so, is it a better alternative – environmentally speaking – to letting grasslands burn?
Climate change is the biggest challenge of our lifetime, which we must address with urgency, but swapping out a hamburger once a month isn’t how we do it.
Marketing efforts distract us from the main climate change polluters by disproportionately blaming sectors such as animal agriculture and the products they produce such as meat and dairy.
The terms “carbon neutral” and “climate neutral” are part of the lexicon of global climate change terms. Though they are sometimes used interchangeably, they have different definitions. Understanding the nuances is important.
UC Davis White Paper Re-Examines Methane’s Role in Climate Change, and How California Dairy Can Achieve Climate Neutrality
DAVIS, Calif., Sept. 2, 2020 – Researchers from the University of California, Davis are rethinking methane and showing that climate neutrality is within reach for the California dairy sector.
In the age of information, it’s often difficult to filter facts from noise. In this episode of Elanco’s Rediscovering the Power of Healthy Animalspodcast with Michelle Calvo-Lorenzo and Sarah Place, CLEAR Center Director, Frank Mitloehner, debunks common misconceptions around livestock and greenhouse gas emissions.
Does eating beef in the U.S. lead to deforestation in places such as the Amazon? That’s an increasingly common question, to which the short answer is no.
When animals are criticized for the part they play in climate change, most often it’s the cattle that take it on the chin. While beef and other products that come from cattle are popular in the United States and abroad, what cattle are often singled out for is the result of a digestive system that differs from those of poultry and swine, two other favorite sources of protein.
