Donate
Beyond beef meatballs in spaghetti

Plant-based meat for a growing world

Improving the efficiency of the Western diet is crucial to achieving sustainability. Plant-based meat allows consumers to enjoy the taste of meat at a fraction of the environmental cost.

File download icon

Save this as a PDF

Download

Global demand for meat is projected to rise 50 percent between 2013 and 2050.1

Considering animal agriculture’s outsized impact on the environment, this could have dire consequences for Earth’s life-supporting ecological systems. But diets are hard to change. Despite decades of advocacy, the percentage of Americans following a plant-based diet has barely budged.2 In fact, in 2018, per capita American meat consumption was within two pounds of being the highest in U.S. history.3

Plant-based meat offers a way out. Combining ingredients in novel ways can deliver the complete culinary experience of meat without the need for a single animal. Plant-based meat fits seamlessly into consumers’ culinary traditions, all but eliminating barriers to behavior change.

Eating plants is fundamentally more efficient than growing plants to feed animals and eating those animals.4,5,6 Even after accounting for the processing required to turn plants into plant-based meat, every study to date finds that replacing conventional meat with plant-based meat substantially reduces every environmental impact measured.7,8,9

“Meat is basically protein, fat, and water. Our game is to find all that in plants and reassemble it against the architecture of meat.”

— Ethan Brown, CEO and co-founder of Beyond Meat 10

Table 1: Environmental benefits of plant-based meat products

Eating this plant-based meatinstead of this
conventional meat		reduces land use
(m2-y/kg) by this much		reduces greenhouse
gas emissions
(kg-CO2-eq/kg)
by this much		reduces water use
(L/kg) by this much		reduces aquatic
eutrophication
potential
(g-PO43-eq/kg) by this much
Impossible Burger 2.07Beef burger*96%89%87%91%
Beyond Burger8Beef burger**—89%99%—
Grillers Original Burger9Beef burger*93%85%95%77%
Spicy Black Bean Burger9Beef burger*97%89%96%76%
Roasted Garlic & Quinoa
Burger9		Beef burger*93%88%98%73%
Grillers Crumbles9Ground beef**99%90%96%—
Original Sausage Patties9Pork sausage patties*47%30%81%51%
Original Chik Patties9Breaded chicken
patties*		84%36%72%75%
This table represents the results of all English-language comparative life cycle assessments of plant-based meat conducted as of May 1, 2019.7,8,9 Because each study differs slightly in its methodology, the results from different studies cannot be precisely compared. *Sold frozen. **Sold fresh. Impact reductions are calculated as follows: (impact of conventional meat ﹣ impact of plant-based meat) ÷ (impact of conventional meat).

Plant-based meat uses 47 percent–99 percent less land than conventional meat (m2-yr-land/kg-meat).


Animal agriculture takes up 77% of all agricultural land on Earth despite supplying only 17% of humanity’s food supply.11 This inefficiency drives the need for agricultural expansion, which is the single largest driver of ecosystem damage on land.12

Fishing, whose yield can also be replaced with plant-based products, is the single largest driver of
ecosystem damage in the oceans.12 Although pigs and chickens always require feed crops, cows can graze in some places where crops can’t grow. However, there is only enough pasture in the United States to support 27% of current beef production, and that includes the grass growing where crops otherwise could.13 Grass-fed meat alone cannot feed America.

In contrast, using all our cropland to grow food for humans instead of animals would allow American
farmers to feed more than twice as many people.14,15 That would increase the food supply three times as much as recovering all the food that spoils or gets thrown away before it can be eaten.15 Plant-based meat offers a promising pathway toward realizing most of this efficiency gain.

Plant-based meat emits 30%–90% less greenhouse gas than conventional meat (kg-CO2-eq/kg-meat).

Worldwide, animal agriculture contributes more to climate change than exhaust emissions from the entire transportation sector.16,17 Animal agriculture’s emissions come from three major sources: conversion of forests and prairies to pasture and cropland,6,18 production of animal feed,19 and animal digestion and waste decomposition.6,20

The primary ingredients for plant-based meats, on the other hand, have very low greenhouse gas emissions,6 and additional processing accounts for only 13%–26% of plant-based meat’s climate impact.8,9 The cropland no longer necessary for animal feed could even be used to mitigate climate change through reforestation, soil conservation, or renewable energy production.21,22,23

Plant-based meat uses 72%–99% less water than conventional meat (l-water/kg-meat).

Animal agriculture guzzles almost a third of the water used in global agriculture.24 Of that water, 99.8% is used in the cultivation of feed crops, draining aquifers that could be used for drinking water or wasting rainwater that could be used to grow food for humans.24

By requiring only the crops that end up in the final product, plant-based meat production cuts out the primary water requirement in conventional meat production. Even though processing accounts for 14%–45% of plant-based meat’s total water use,8,9 conventional meat’s water use far surpasses that of every plant-based meat evaluated to date.

Plant-based meat causes 51%–91% less aquatic nutrient pollution than conventional meat (g-PO43-eq/kg-meat).

Eutrophication is a leading threat to global water quality, and animal agriculture is one of its primary sources.25 Eutrophication occurs when nitrogen and phosphorus runoff into waterways, stimulating the growth of algal blooms that suffocate aquatic life. Animal agriculture is doubly harmful, thanks to pollution from the fertilizer used on feed crops and the manure animals produce.26 Each of the largest pig farms produces more excrement than the city of Philadelphia, but they don’t have wastewater treatment facilities.20 Manure often sits in open lagoons before being sprayed over nearby fields, creating extreme health risks for local communities.20

Plant-based meat solves both problems. It requires a fraction of the cropland and proportionately less fertilizer. It also produces no manure, eliminating both the eutrophication and the direct human health risks associated with massive amounts of untreated animal waste.

Table 2: Industrial animal agriculture threatens the environment and society in four key ways. Here’s how plant-based meat stacks up:

Conventional animal meatPlant-based meat
Land useOver one-third of all habitable land on Earth is used to support animals, threatening a global ecological crisis.Harm: Greatly reduced
Certainty: High
Climate changeAnimal agriculture is responsible for the vast majority of food sector greenhouse gas emissions.Harm: Reduced
Certainty: High
Water pollutionUntreated manure and excess fertilizer are major sources of ecological damage and human illness.Harm: Greatly reduced
Certainty: High
Antibiotic resistanceFeeding antibiotics to healthy animals causes microbes to become resistant, making life-saving drugs useless in human medicine.Harm: Eliminated
Certainty: High

Plant-based meat requires no antibiotics.


In the United States, over 70% of medically relevant antibiotics are used in animal agriculture.27 Healthy animals are fed low doses of antibiotics to speed growth and prevent disease, causing bacteria to adapt and become resistant.27,28 Many of these antibiotics are used in human medicine, so when bacteria become resistant, hospitals can no longer defend against them.27,29 If left unchecked, by 2050 drug-resistant microbes could kill 10 million people each year (more than currently die of cancer) and cause a cumulative $100 trillion in economic damage (as much as the global economic crisis of 2008–2009).27

Plant-based meat requires no antibiotics at all. It also greatly reduces the risk of antifungal resistance, which can arise from the use of fungicides on crops,31 because plant-based meat requires much less crop production than conventional meat.

Pathway to a sustainable food supply

Between its resource efficiency and its appeal to consumers, plant-based meat has tremendous potential to help build a sustainable food supply. However, there’s still a long way to go. Truly meat-like products have been widely available to consumers only since 2013, and plant-based meat still makes up just 1% of the retail meat market.31

After millennia of optimization, animal agriculture is hitting declining returns in quality and efficiency, but plant-based meat can continue to improve by leaps and bounds. Public research can support the development of new products and processes to make plant-based meat even more delicious, affordable, and environmentally sustainable than it already is.

A level playing field will ensure that these products can compete fairly in the marketplace. This requires
commonsense labeling rules and evidence-based safety standards.

Institutional support from food companies, food service providers, governments, and environmental advocates can accelerate the transition to a sustainable food system.

References:

  1. Roser M. Global Meat Projections to 2050. In: OurWorldInData.org [Internet]. 2019 [cited 1 Jul 2019]. Available: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/global-meat-projections-to-2050
  2. Reinhardt RJ. Snapshot: Few Americans vegetarian or vegan. In: News.Gallup.com [Internet]. 1 Aug 2018 [cited 6 Jun 2019].
    Available: https://news.gallup.com/poll/238328/snapshot-few-americans-vegetarian-vegan.aspx
  3. Meat supply and disappearance. In: ERS.USDA.gov [Internet]. 29 May 2019 [cited 6 Jun 2019]. Available: https://www.ers.usda.gov/
    data-products/livestock-meat-domestic-data/
  4. Chapin III FS, Matson PA, Vitousek P. Principles of Terrestrial Ecosystem Ecology, 2nd Edition. Springer Science+Business Media; 2011.
  5. Aleksandrowicz L, Green R, Joy EJM, Smith P, Haines A. The Impacts of Dietary Change on Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Land Use,
    Water Use, and Health: A Systematic Review. PLoS One. 2016;11: e0165797.
  6. Poore J, Nemecek T. Reducing Food’s Environmental Impacts Through Producers and Consumers. Science. 2018;360: 987–992.
  7. Khan S, Loyola C, Dettling J, Hester J, Moses R. Comparative environmental LCA of the Impossible Burger with conventional ground
    beef burger [Internet]. Quantis USA and Impossible Foods; 27 Feb 2019. Available: https://impossiblefoods.com/mission/lcaupdate-2019/
  8. Heller MC, Keoleian GA. Beyond Meat’s Beyond Burger life cycle assessment: A detailed comparison between a plant-based and
    an animal-based protein source [Internet]. University of Michigan Center for Sustainable Systems; 14 Sep 2018. Available: http://css.
    umich.edu/publication/beyond-meats-beyond-burger-life-cycle-assessment-detailed-comparison-between-plant-based
  9. Dettling J, Tu Q, Faist M, DelDuce A, Mandelbaum S. A comparative life cycle assessment of plant-based foods and meat
    foods [Internet]. Quantis USA and MorningStar Farms; Mar 2016. Available: https://www.morningstarfarms.com/content/dam/
    morningstarfarms/pdf/MSFPlantBasedLCAReport_2016-04-10_Final.pdf
  10. Rosenfeld D. Beyond Meat is re-imagining meat in El Segundo with great success. In: DailyBreeze.com [Internet]. 26 Oct 2018
    [cited 6 Jun 2019]. Available: http://www.dailybreeze.com/this-company-is-re-imagining-meat-in-el-segundo-with-great-success
  11. Roser M, Ritchie H. Yields and land use in agriculture. In: OurWorldInData.org [Internet]. 2019 [cited 6 Jun 2019]. Available: https://
    ourworldindata.org/yields-and-land-use-in-agriculture
  12. Díaz S, Settele J, Brondízio E. IPBES global assessment summary for policymakers [Internet]. United Nations; 6 May 2019. Available:
    https://www.ipbes.net/sites/default/files/downloads/spm_unedited_advance_for_posting_htn.pdf
  13. Hayek MN, Garrett RD. Nationwide Shift to Grass-Fed Beef Requires Larger Cattle Population. Environmental Research Letters. 2018;13:
    084005.
  14. Peters C, Picardy J, Darrouzet-Nardi A, Wilkins J, Griffin T, Fick G. Carrying Capacity of U.S. Agricultural Land: Ten Diet Scenarios.
    Elementa: Science of the Anthropocene. 2016;4: 000116.
  15. Shepon A, Eshel G, Noor E, Milo R. The Opportunity Cost of Animal Based Diets Exceeds All Food Losses. Proceedings of the National
    Academies of Sciences USA. 2018;115: 3804–3809.
  16. Gerber PJ, Steinfeld H, Henderson B, Mottet A, Opio C, Dijkman J, Falcucci A, Tempio G. Tackling climate change through livestock:
    A global assessment of emissions and mitigation opportunities [Internet]. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations;
  17. Available: http://www.fao.org/3/i3437e/i3437e.pdf
  18. Edenhofer O, et al., eds. Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change: Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth
    Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press; 2014.
  19. Vermeulen SJ, Campbell BM, Ingram JSI. Climate Change and Food Systems. Annual Review of Environment and Resources. 2012;37:
    195–222.
  20. Kebreab E, Liedke A, Caro D, Deimling S, Binder M, Finkbeiner M. Environmental Impact of Using Specialty Feed Ingredients in Swine
    and Poultry Production: A Life Cycle Assessment. Journal of Animal Science. 2016;94: 2664–2681.
  21. Hribar C, Schultz M. Understanding Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations and Their Impact on Communities [Internet]. National
    Association of Local Boards of Health; 2010. Available: https://www.cdc.gov/nceh/ehs/docs/understanding_cafos_nalboh.pdf
  22. Stehfest E, Bouwman L, van Vuuren DP, den Elzen MG, Eickhout B, Kabat P. Climate Benefits of Changing Diet. Climate Change.
    2009;95: 83–102.
  23. Smith P, et al. How Much Land-Based Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Can Be Achieved Without Compromising Food Security and
    Environmental Goals? Global Change Biology. 2013;19: 2285–2302.
  24. Lamb A, et al. The Potential for Land Sparing to Offset Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Agriculture. Nature Climate Change. 2016;6: 488.
  25. Herrero M, Wirsenius S, Henderson B, Rigolot C, Thornton P, Havlik P, de Boer I, Gerber PJ. Livestock and the Environment: What Have
    We Learned in the Past Decade? Annual Review of Environment and Resources. 2015;40: 177–202.
  26. Selman M, Greenhalgh S, Díaz R, Sugg Z. Eutrophication and hypoxia in coastal areas: A global assessment of the state of knowledge.
    World Resources Institute; Mar 2008. Available: https://wriorg.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/pdf/eutrophication_and_hypoxia_in
    _coastal_areas.pdf?_ga=2.112570948.1338149515.1558621682-700640967.1556910199
  27. Mateo-Sagasta J, Marjani Zadeh S, Turral H. Water pollution from agriculture: A global review: Executive summary [Internet]. Food
    and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and International Water Management Institute; 2017. Available: http://www.fao.
    org/3/a-i7754e.pdf
  28. O’Neill J. Tackling drug-resistant infections globally: Final report and recommendations [Internet]. Review on Antimicrobial Resistance;
  29. Available: https://amr-review.org/sites/default/files/160518_Final%20paper_with%20cover.pdf
  30. Marshal BM, Levy SB. Food Animals and Antimicrobials: Impacts on Human Health. Clinical Microbiology Reviews. 2011;24: 718–733.
  31. No time to wait: Securing the future from drug-resistant infections [Internet]. United Nations Interagency Coordination Group on
    Antimicrobial Resistance; 2019. Available: https://www.who.int/antimicrobial-resistance/interagency-coordination-group/IACG_final
    _report_EN.pdf?ua=1&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosscience&stream=science
  32. Fisher MC, Hawkins NJ, Sanglard D, Gurr SJ. Worldwide Emergence of Resistance to Antifungal Drugs Challenges Human Health and
    Food Security. Science. 2018;360: 739–742.
  33. U.S. plant-based market overview [Internet]. The Good Food Institute; 2018. Available: https://www.gfi.org/marketresearch

Header image courtesy of Beyond Meat

Donate