Giving Compass' Take:
- Noah Tobias discusses a new report suggesting that plant-based alternatives to meat are not likely to replace factory-farmed meat.
- How are plant-based meats still bad for the environment, even though they're less bad than factory-farmed meat?
- Read more about how meat alternatives warrant more research.
What is Giving Compass?
We connect donors to learning resources and ways to support community-led solutions. Learn more about us.
According to a recent report from the nonprofit organization FoodPrint, plant-based meat alternatives are unlikely to replace factory-farmed meat.
Demand for plant-based meat is on the rise around the world. An analysis from the Plant Based Foods Association and Good Food Institute finds that sales of plant-based products in the United States are up 27 percent in 2020 from the previous year. And a recent study from the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine reports that the number of people who consume plant-based products has doubled from 6.7 percent to 13.1 percent in the last decade. By 2030, analysts from Barclays project that the global market for plant-based meat will exceed US$140 billion.
Much of this growth stems from an increase in environmentally-conscious consumers, looking to heal the planet by cutting back on their meat consumption. Meat production—especially beef—emits more than twice the carbon dioxide of plant-based foods.
“Most [alternative meat products] compare themselves to, and offer themselves as an alternative to, factory-farmed meat and its terrible environmental impact,” Jerusha Klemperer, Director of FoodPrint, tells Food Tank.
It’s likely, FoodPrint’s report concludes, that ultra-processed meat alternatives have a lower environmental impact than animal agriculture. Producing a four-ounce Beyond Burger, for example, requires only a tenth of the land necessary to produce a four-ounce beef burger.
Read the full article about alternative meats by Noah Tobias at Food Tank.