Is Lamb Actually More Sustainable Than Beef? Examining the Environmental Impact

With growing awareness around sustainability and food’s impact on the planet, more consumers are questioning their meat choices. Two meats often compared for their environmental friendliness are lamb and beef But when it comes to sustainability, is lamb truly a better option than beef?

In this article, we’ll analyze the land usage, greenhouse gas emissions, and other factors to determine if lamb deserves its reputation as a greener meat protein.

Key Differences in Raising Lambs vs. Cattle

To understand the sustainability implications, it’s important to look at how lambs and cattle are raised. Here are some of the main differences:

Land usage: Sheep need less land and vegetation than cattle to graze and reach slaughter weight.
Feed efficiency: Lambs require about half the amount of feed per pound compared to cattle.
Reproduction rates: Sheep usually only birth 1 lamb per year while cattle average 1 calf. However, cattle live longer than sheep.
Grazing habits: Sheep are less likely to damage root systems and soil quality compared to cattle.

Overall, sheep can be raised in smaller spaces, eat less, and reproduce faster than cows. This results in certain sustainability advantages.

Comparing the Environmental Impacts

When looking at the numbers, lamb does have a lower ecological impact in certain areas:

Land usage: Lamb requires 2 times less land than beef for the same quantity of meat.
Water usage: The water footprint of lamb is 2 times lower than beef.
Carbon emissions: Lamb generates about half the amount of greenhouse gases as beef per pound.

However, exact sustainability depends heavily on how the animals are raised Best practices like rotational grazing and sustainable feed can improve both lamb and beef farming

Other Sustainability Considerations

Land and emissions aren’t the only factors that play into meat’s environmental impact. Here are some other elements to weigh:

Deforestation: Clearing forests to create new pastures is damaging. Buying meat from deforested regions supports this practice.
Food waste: Higher demand for lamb could increase food waste if supply exceeds consumption. Moderation is key.
Transportation: The distance meat travels to market affects its fossil fuel usage. Choosing local is ideal.
Farming practices: Small sustainable farms are preferable to industrial factory farming.

When factoring in these aspects, lamb from local farms using regenerative techniques offers sustainability advantages.

The Role of Consumer Behavior

While lamb compares favorably to beef in some ecological metrics, consumer behavior also plays a major role:

Eat less meat overall: Moderating total meat intake reduces demand for grazing land and feed crops.
Balance meat proteins: Chicken and pork have lower footprints than ruminant meats like lamb and beef.
Reduce food waste: Throwing away unused meat negates sustainability benefits. Proper storage and reuse helps.

The Takeaway

So is lamb more sustainable than beef? In many aspects, yes. Lambs require fewer resources and emit less greenhouse gases pound for pound. However, with mindful production methods and consumer habits, both lamb and beef can fit into an environmentally friendly diet.

Rather than completely avoiding lamb or beef, incorporating them in moderation along with other proteins like chicken, pork, and plant-based foods can help balance sustainability with enjoyment. As with most foods, the key is conscientious consumption and avoiding waste.

The bottom line? Lamb has sustainability advantages over beef, but both can be eaten sparingly as part of an overall eco-friendly diet. With some simple practices, we can help ensure future generations can enjoy these meats as well.

Bad – Mutton and Lamb

The Environmental Working Group (EWG) says that making 1 pound of lamb causes more pollution than making the same amount of beef. However, Americans don’t eat much lamb and mutton.

Per capita lamb consumption in the United States is about 1 pound per year. But at 39. 2 kg CO2-eq per kilogram, replacing beef with lamb is not going to improve your foodprint.

In short, avoid both beef and lamb to minimize your foodprint. If you switch these proteins for the ones below, you can cut your emissions by up to half at your next meal.

U.S. per capita pork consumption was 52 pounds in 2020. The “other white meat” is a better option than beef.

Unlike cows and sheep, pigs are not ruminants, which means they produce a lot less methane, but thanks to intensive farming operations, pork has the third-highest environmental impact among meats.

It takes about 7 to 12 kg of CO2 to produce 1 kg of pork, which is less than a third of the CO2 produced by beef farming.

Poultry has a smaller foodprint than other meats.

Poore & Nemecek’s international study found that poultry averages 6. 0 kg C02-eq per kilogram of meat. And outside the U. S. , production methods are often less carbon-intensive. The EWG divides American poultry into chicken (at 6. 9 kg CO2-eq) and turkey (at 10. 9 kg CO2-eq). Note that turkey is in a tie with pork.

Eggs have less impact than meat and may be produced even more sustainably at home.

In a sign that many Americans are reducing their foodprint, beef and pork consumption have dropped while poultry consumption is on the rise. Americans ate an average of 97.6 pounds of chicken per person in 2020, and just 15.8 pounds of turkey.

Benefits of Lamb (The HEALTHIEST Meat?!)

FAQ

Is lamb or beef better for the environment?

The Environmental Working Group (EWG) estimates that producing 1 pound of lamb produces more emissions than the same serving of beef. However, Americans don’t eat much lamb and mutton. Per capita lamb consumption in the United States is about 1 pound per year.

What meat is the most sustainable?

Sustainability experts typically encourage people to eat less beef and more pork and chicken, because the latter are more efficient at converting feed into animal protein.

Is eating lamb sustainable?

Lamb — 18% Sheep come up to weight a lot faster and are less resource-intensive than cattle, but ewes usually have just one offspring a year, making them less efficient to raise than pigs or chickens, which reproduce much more frequently. Keep lamb in the rotation, but again, it’s not an every day meat.

Why is lamb’s carbon footprint so high?

As we see, methane emissions are large for beef and lamb. This is because cattle and lamb are what we call ‘ruminants’, in the process of digesting food they produce a lot of methane. If we removed methane their emissions would fall by around half.

Is eating less meat better than eating the most sustainable meat?

If you want a lower-carbon diet, eating less meat is nearly always better than eating the most sustainable meat. This is also true for the differences between meat products.

Are chicken & pork ‘better’ than beef & lamb?

For example, when only considering the climate impact, chicken and pork are ‘better’ options than beef or lamb, as their production emits considerably less greenhouse gases per kilogram of meat or per gram of protein 2, 25.

What is sustainable meat?

Enter: Sustainable meat. What makes a meat “sustainable”? “Sustainable” isn’t an FDA-approved term for food. McQuillan says the meaning can vary between products, ranging from meaningless marketing buzzwords to genuine changes in the entire way the meat is produced, sold and consumed.

Could low-impact beef and Lamb have a lower footprint than plant-based alternatives?

If I source my beef or lamb from low-impact producers, could they have a lower footprint than plant-based alternatives?The evidence suggests, no: plant-based foods emit fewer greenhouse gases than meat and dairy, regardless of how they are produced.