This special issue of the Frontiers Report focuses on the potential environmental, health, social and animal welfare implications of the uptake of novel meat and dairy alternatives, in particular... Show moreThis special issue of the Frontiers Report focuses on the potential environmental, health, social and animal welfare implications of the uptake of novel meat and dairy alternatives, in particular novel plant-based, fermentation-derived and cultivated products. A team of interdisciplinary experts has assessed the available evidence on the impacts of these alternatives in comparison with their conventional counterparts, identifying pertinent considerations for policymakers involved in regulating, investing in or providing other support for novel meat and dairy products and highlighting research gaps. Show less
Agriculture, especially the livestock sector, hugely stresses the environment through its climate change, land use, and water use impacts, among others. Hence, reducing meat consumption can greatly... Show moreAgriculture, especially the livestock sector, hugely stresses the environment through its climate change, land use, and water use impacts, among others. Hence, reducing meat consumption can greatly reduce agriculture’s heavy environmental burden. Meat replacements can deliver similar nutrients, and some even mimic meat to facilitate substitution. However, replacements come with their own environmental impacts, which can be highly uncertain, particularly for emerging replacements. This chapter synthesizes the environmental impacts of meat (poultry, pork, and beef) compared to conventional (seafood, eggs, tofu and tempeh, pulses, and nuts) and emerging (plant-based meat analogs, algae, mycoprotein, insects, and cultured meat) meat replacements. We compare their environmental impacts based on life cycle assessment and highlight impact hotspots, opportunities for improvement, and key research gaps. Overall, while conventional replacements already offer more sustainable alternatives to meat, emerging replacements often result in trade-offs that we can proactively tackle today to reduce environmental impacts in the future. Show less
Rueda, O.; Mogollón, J.M.; Tukker, A.; Scherer, L. 2021
Our carbon-intensive economy has led to an average temperature rise of 1 °C since pre-industrial times. As a consequence, the world has seen increasing droughts, significant shrinking of the polar... Show moreOur carbon-intensive economy has led to an average temperature rise of 1 °C since pre-industrial times. As a consequence, the world has seen increasing droughts, significant shrinking of the polar ice caps, and steady sea-level rise. To stall these issues’ worsening further, we must limit global warming to 1.5 °C. In addition to the economy’s decarbonization, this endeavour requires the use of negative-emissions technologies (NETs) that remove the main greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide, from the atmosphere. While techno-economic feasibility alone has driven the definition of negative-emissions solutions, NETs’ diverse, far-reaching implications demand a more holistic assessment. Here, we present a comprehensive framework, integrating NETs’ critical performance aspects of feasibility, effectiveness, and side impacts, to define the optimal technology mix within realistic outlooks. The resulting technology portfolios provide a useful new benchmark to compare carbon avoidance and removal measures and deliberately choose the best path to solve the climate emergency. Show less
