Global Warning: How The Cattle Industry Is Ignoring Methane Emissions

A promise by more than 105 nations to join a US-led and EU-led coalition to cut 30% of methane emissions by 2030 was one of the first and most eye-catching statements at the COP climate conference in Glasgow in November. The strong greenhouse gas, which is up to 80 times more efficient at heating the globe in the short term than carbon dioxide, has long been regarded as the easiest way to reduce global warming. According to the United Nations Global Methane Assessment, the COP promises alone would reduce warming estimates by 0.2°C by the 2040s. 

However, the low-hanging fruit is beginning to spoil. The meat and dairy industries (including livestock suppliers to McDonalds, Walmart, and Costco) are undermining COP26 methane reduction pledges by not tracking their own emissions and failing to track those of their third-party suppliers, according to a new report released by the FAIRR Initiative, a $45 trillion investor network focused on the environmental, social, and governance risks and opportunities of intensive livestock production. 

Methane is produced as a byproduct of the digestive process in cows and other ruminants. Each cow may produce 250-500 litres of methane every day. When animals' excrement is gathered in holding ponds, which is a common technique among large-scale commercial meat producers, more methane is created. The one billion cows utilised in the worldwide meat and dairy sectors, together with other livestock animals, release the methane equivalent of 3.1 gigatons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year, accounting for 44 percent of global anthropogenic methane emissions. If the global cattle sector were a country, it would be the world's third-largest producer of greenhouse gases, trailing only the United States and India in terms of overall emissions. 

Also check out: How a Market in Hyderabad is Turning waste into wealth? 

According to the Coller FAIRR Protein Producer Index, which evaluates factory farming's sustainability, the industry isn't doing anything to address the problem. Only 18 percent of worldwide meat and dairy farmers measure their methane emissions, according to this year's study. One in four of the firms that measure their emissions experienced a rise this year. "The COP26 aspirations gave the food and agricultural industry a major share of responsibility," says Jeremy Coller, chair of the FAIRR investor network. "We won't be able to meet the COP26 obligations until we manage the protein supply chain... Nonetheless, problems ranging from methane to manure management highlight the market's growing perception that cows are the new coal." 

The Index, now in its fourth year, evaluates 60 worldwide and publicly-traded animal protein manufacturers, worth a total of $363 billion, based on ten environmental, social, and governance issues such as greenhouse gas emissions, deforestation, antibiotic use, and investment in alternative proteins. The findings are made public so that FAIRR's investors, as well as others, may evaluate the sustainability and climate commitments of the firms in their portfolios. It also serves as a standard for the industry and a motivator for progress. "We must leverage the leadership developing in areas of the business and revolutionize the way our food, particularly protein, is produced if we are to avoid the meat and dairy sector becoming a stranded asset," Coller adds. 

Some of the businesses surveyed are increasing their investments in sustainable feed ingredients. Despite the fact that JBS, the world's largest beef producer, is failing to measure emissions, it is working to minimize methane emissions by cooperating with DSM, a Netherlands feed additive business, to help cattle lower emissions through the use of a new dietary supplement. Of course, this does not address the issue of land-use changes such as deforestation associated with cattle grazing, which leads to increasing carbon emissions. 

The sluggish adoption of methane tracking and reduction measures by the meat and dairy industries is paradoxical, considering that they are anticipated to be two of the industrial sectors most severely impacted by climate change. At least seven of the 60 corporations are already disclosing climate-related financial repercussions, according to the FAIRR report. Tyson Foods, situated in the United States, had its operating income drop $410 million year over year in the first nine months of 2021, owing in part to severe weather interruptions. As the cost of feed rises, the Brazilian corporation BRF, one of the world's largest food conglomerates, believes that climatically-influenced fluctuations in precipitation rates are already resulting in yearly losses of up to $140 million. For investors, this alone should be a warning flag. 

"The evidence is clear that high-emitting industries like agriculture must alter themselves in the next decade to avoid runaway climate change," says Eugenie Mathieu, Senior Analyst at Aviva Investors, a member of the FAIRR network. "Eighty-six percent of the world's largest meat and dairy suppliers have yet to set substantial emissions reduction objectives, which is extremely unhelpful given that extreme weather events are progressively harming these firms' bottom lines." Investors can help by requiring that the animal protein producers in which they invest step up to the plate and accelerate transformation."