Category Archives: 2/October/2017 – Table Talk – Eco-anxiety

Beans > Beef

Posted on by

This table talk was actually rather difficult for me, as it forced me to face an issue I am very familiar with from a very specific perspective. I abstain from consuming any and all animal products for ethical reasons; I don’t support killing animals for pleasure. As a result, I’ve tried my best to educate myself on animal agriculture and its effects on animal welfare, the environment, and human health. The eco-anxiety table talk forced me to consider the issue of consuming animal products from a strictly environmental perspective, and it focused the discussion on one specific substitution: beans for beef. As someone who has completely eliminated animal products from my diet, it’s difficult for me to acknowledge that simply slightly reducing animal product consumption is also beneficial. In fact, it is probably more effective to convince more people to reduce their intake than to try to convince everyone to go vegan. People would be much more receptive to the idea of reduction, which would not negatively impact their social standing, or prevent them from ever eating their favorite foods again.

One important point that another scholar made during the table talk was that the “beans for beef” article in The Atlantic failed to account for individual financial considerations. Many Americans live in poverty, and simply do not have the time or the money to buy beans instead of beef. While beans are much cheaper than beef and are one of the cheapest foods in the world, many poor Americans are still forced to opt for beef. Because of heavy meat and dairy subsidies, fast food companies can sell extremely cheap beef-based meals. People working multiple jobs with very little finances end up buying these fast food options because they don’t have the time for anything else – even if beans are cheaper. It is easy to forget how difficult choosing plant-based options would be for the poor while discussing the issue in an all-you-can-eat dining hall at a prestigious university. Of course, the fact that the poor are unable to make this choice does not excuse privileged college students from making the right choice themselves, but it does make The Atlantic‘s idea of everyone making the beans/beef switch impossible.

Eco-anxiety and cutting out beef

Posted on by

This past Monday, I went to a table talk about eco-anxiety and a proposed method to help combat it. The discussion was based off an article that suggested that by substituting eating beans instead of beef we could dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

We talked about how culture is deeply tied to our food consumption patterns, the economics of making the choice to switch on both a personal and large scale level, the ethics behind different diets, and even some compromises such as meat grown in a lab and other ways to reduce eco-anxiety and/or emissions for people who didn’t want to give up beef entirely.

One interesting thing we talked about is how it is easier to make a change to one’s lifestyle when they have support from other people in their lives and how to see a large number of people take up this initiative support from groups and in one example universities would be necessary. Another was how big industry helps keep us consuming meat and dairy products and how that impacts not only us, but the animals who end up being food.

Eco-Anxiety and Food

Posted on by

Last Monday, I attended the table talk about eco-anxiety. The discussion was based on an article in The Atlantic, about the effect of dietary choices on the environment. The article suggested that if everyone, hypothetically, substituted beans for beef, the U.S would come close to meeting its 2020 greenhouse-gas emission goals. It’s astounding that such a drastic change can be achieved by a single dietary ‘swap’, without any other variations in diet (The consumption of other meats and animal products can stay constant), energy infrastructure or transportation. More than anything, this statement reveals problems with meat production.

Usually, cattle in industrial systems are fed a mix of corn, soy and other grains or beans. Historically, they used to graze on pastures and were fed a mix of hay and other grasses. Among with a few other discoveries, it was found that animals that were fed caloric-dense foods, as opposed to grass, tended to gain mass at a quicker pace. Since farmers that adopted this new feed were able to produce meat at a faster rate, the industry quickly shifted to caloric dense feeds. A significant amount of fertilisers are required to produce these new feeds in the required quantities. Although cows are notorious for being generators of methane, the use of fertilisers to produce their feed also adds significantly to both the total carbon footprint and to environmental pollution.

Even though meat production has issues of sustainability, it is not reasonable to advocate a complete stop in the consumption of beef or any other meat/animal product. Statements like the one made in the article are important as they indicate inefficiencies in the current food production system. However, they may not be the most effective guideline for personal action. Diets are varied, with every individual having different needs or inclinations towards different foods. Another method of dealing with eco-anxiety related food and food production would be structural and education changes to encourage a balanced diet, as opposed to over-consumption of certain foods (Specifically those with a high carbon footprint).

Beans for beef: save a cow, save the environment

Posted on by

This week’s table talk was all about eco-anxiety and the conscious choices we make when it comes to food and the environment. It was a great discussion and we approached the issue from almost every possible angle – economically, morally, culturally, politically, logistically, etc. I especially found the cultural and ethical aspects to be very interesting and engaging.

A lot of people at the table were vegetarians or vegans. I myself am a half-vegetarian as I only eat chicken, eggs, and the occasional serving of fish and chips. Unlike a lot of people there, I didn’t really choose that sort of diet for ethical reasons but rather for cultural ones. No one in my family eats red meat so I never have either and never want to. But on the flip side, a lot of people are unwilling to give up meat for similar cultural reasons. People undoubtedly have a close connection with the food they grew up with and don’t readily want to give it up. On another level, especially in America, eating meat is often tied with being ‘macho’ and being vegan is seen as ‘wimpy.’ For example, the top search suggestions for veganism: ‘unhealthy,’ ‘debunked,’ and ‘is a cult.’ I think it would be impossible to convince most people to trade in their beef for beans and no amount of scientific evidence is going to change that. We’d have to really start with educating young children but even that has complexities in terms of economics and social inequality. As one scholar brought up, choosing to be vegetarian or vegan is a privilege that many people don’t have.

Another aspect that was really intriguing to me was the tie between environmental activism and ethics. For example, if one person gives up meat but the majority of people don’t, that could be discouraging for the person to continue. I think if you are truly passionate about the environment, you can still drive yourself to do what you think is right regardless of whether other people join or not. I personally try to follow Kantian ethics and the categorical imperative which is to act in a way that you would like other people act as if it were a universal law. Maybe two extra minutes in the shower won’t single-handedly destroy the planet, but can it be justified if everyone took longer showers? With such a daunting problem like climate change, I find it alleviates eco-anxiety when you to try to do your part to make a change and to know your conscious would be clear if your behaviour was universalised.

We’ve Put a Lot of Work Into This Planet

Posted on by

Last Monday, I attended a Table Talk on Eco-Anxiety. Eco-anxiety can refer to multiple things, such as the predilection for traumatic climate events such as hurricanes and food shortages to provoke other mental illnesses, but we discussed eco-anxiety as a manifestation of a unique concern concerning our climate and the impact our actions can have (or the lack thereof). We began the discussion by talking about this article and sharing our reactions and criticisms of the radical suggestion put forth by the article. Someone suggested that this article ignores the economic privilege required to be able to afford a vegetarian lifestyle, both in terms of money and time (although meat is often more expensive than produce, the time required to prepare vegetarian meals may be too much for families in which the parents must work multiple jobs, and fast food is both cheap and full of meat). We also discussed the unpredictable economic and social ramifications of the entire population switching from beef to beans, including the shockwave it could send through the agriculture and livestock industry.

After agreeing the article was interesting but idealistic, we moved on to discussing eco-anxiety in our own lives. People shared their experiences, including why they chose why or why not to be vegetarian and how they sustain that lifestyle. The subject of our individual contributions to minimizing climate change came up, and one person shared a story of her friend’s choice to go vegan and how that friend in turn inspired several others to go vegan as well. It was a small but powerful reminder that an individual can make a larger impact and that we shouldn’t feel completely powerless when thinking about climate change.

Eco-Anxiety

Posted on by

Prior to the table talk, we were all given an article to read. The article addresses something called ‘eco-anxiety’ — without going to deeply into it, it’s the anxiety associated with global warming and climate change. The article suggested that people should trade “beef for beans” — ie, eating beans instead of eating beef. Apparently, even a simple change like this can help curb the impacts of global warming (and help alleviate eco-anxiety).

Through the table talk, we really went into how asking everyone to eat beans instead of beef is actually not as simple as the article makes it sound. Climate-change is a multi-faceted problem that can’t be solved by that one change (though I think it was mentioned that if we all made that change, we would be able to meet the climate change goals), but even making that one change can prove to be very difficult. The article made it sound incredibly easy, but in reality, changing people’s diets is one related to both culture and socio-economic status. For example, I know in my own family and some aspect of my culture, we show our love for each other through food–so when I first became vegetarian, my family was really confused and wasn’t sure what to make of it. Not to mention, I felt like I was inconveniencing them a lot of the times during family gatherings and dinner. Another problem would be the feasibility of this; in watching another documentary last year, I learned that there were food deserts in America where produce and healthy food isn’t always readily available, so trading beef for beans might be hard in those areas.

Overall, I think the suggestion that people should trade beef for beans is a really good idea and a great sentiment, but there are a lot more things that we have to consider before saying it’s a great idea and that everyone should adopt it, because it’s not always possible (even if the article made it seem really easy). Though I think that if trading beef for beans for yourself helps quell your eco-anxiety, you should definitely do it.