Expert: “Vegetarian dishes better than the meat – no doubt about it” – Svenska Dagbladet

"the Article may give the impression that there are no climate problems with meat. And it is a pity," says Swedish expert Martin.. Photo: press photo /Magnus Hjalmarson Neideman

In the article goes to Peter Sylwan to the attack against those who argue for a köttskatt, and claims that it is "just as meaningful as wanting to reduce the transport sector’s impact on climate with a general hjulskatt".

Peter Sylwan point on that farming in general is bad for the climate, since the carbon stored in the soil is released when soil is ploughed. Therefore, meat that comes from animals that graze freely on the grassland "more eco-friendly than most of what we eat".

"It is, therefore, as a bloody steak can be a lot more eco-friendly than a big bönburgare," he writes.

But the article gives a too simplified picture of the carbon footprint, and miss several important aspects, says Martin. at the Agriculture department – which, among other things, has written this review of meat’s climate impact.

We eat 40% more meat than in the 1990s

– The article may give the impression that there are no climate problems with meat. And it is a pity. We eat 40% more meat than in the 1990s in Sweden today. Our meat consumption and production is simply not sustainable in the day at the levels we eat in the west, ” he says.

One of the aspects that is missed in the article is, according to Martin. that meat production is the largest carbon footprint comes from the greenhouse gas methane – a gas 25 times more potent than carbon dioxide. To set the emissions of methane gas from beef production towards the emission of carbon dioxide from agriculture can therefore be misleading, according to Martin..

at the same time claimed in the article that "all flesh is hay", then the cows eat the silage produced from grass in the winter. The land where the grass grows is according to the article "kolslukande grassland" when the grass stores carbon in the soil.

slides the article in truth, according to Martin.. For the first eat a normal cow daily around ten kilos of concentrates, among other things, containing soybeans. Second is the claim that the gräsmarken would be a kolslukare a truth with modification.

– He simplifies a bit here, especially when it comes to the soil’s ability to store carbon dioxide. The fact is that the potential to kolinlagring is very small in the our grasslands, most of the chips are in the balance, ” he says.

at the same time have the article right in that it is a very big difference between meat and meat, ” points out Martin..

– He argues that it is not good with a general köttskatt, but there is probably no one versed really think we should have.

How to think like a consumer if you still want to eat meat?

– Eat less meat and choose meat with care. Cows only eat grass in the natural pasture, and additionally milked, are significantly means that the plans we, ” says Martin., and continues:

– But again, the problem is that the type of meat is very rare and never come up in the quantities consumed today.

And what is the best, purely climatically: meat or vegetarian?

− So that production is carried out in the day is vegetarian better, there is no doubt about that. But it is good that the issue is being discussed.