According to Stanford University environmental scientist David Lobell, alternative meat is unlikely to offset livestock’s greenhouse gas (GHG) and land use impacts in the near future.
Lobell, who teaches the class called Re-Thinking Meat at Stanford’s Center on Food Security and the Environment, suggested it would be more prudent to invest money into reducing the emission of animal-based systems. Lobell said there had been little incentive to improve the emissions of animals and there could be a lot of innovation with a small investment.
Lobell said animal agriculture will be in the majority for a long time, and there’s more benefit to improving them rather than investing in alternative meat, which will maintain a smaller protein supply.
“In general, all the bashing of cattle and ranching is counterproductive,” Lobell said. “First off, it misses the key role that ruminants have played in making nutrition and livelihoods. In some ways, cattle have been a transformative technology for the growth of civilization, and they continue to be key parts of nutrition, especially in marginal regions where most crops aren’t viable.”
