chicken

Electricity from chicken feathers

December 4, 2023 By EarthWise Leave a Comment

The food industry generates enormous amounts of waste and by-products. Each year, 40 million tons of chicken feathers are incinerated, causing adverse environmental effects. Not only does it release large amounts of carbon dioxide but also produces toxic gases such as sulfur dioxide.

Researchers at ETH Zurich in Switzerland and Nanyang Technological University in Singapore have developed a way to put chicken feathers to good use by using them to make fuel cells more cost-effective and sustainable.

Using a simple and environmentally friendly process, they extract the keratin from the feathers. Keratin is the protein that helps form hair, nails, the outer layer of skin, and feathers. The extracted keratin is then converted into ultra-fine fibers known as amyloid fibrils. The keratin fibrils are used in the membrane of a fuel cell.

Fuel cells generate clean energy from hydrogen and oxygen with only heat and water as byproducts. At the heart of every fuel cell is a semipermeable membrane that allows protons to pass through but blocks electrons, thereby producing an electric current. Fuel cells are the primary way hydrogen is used to directly generate electricity. Hydrogen cars run on fuel cells.

Conventional fuel cells typically use membranes made from highly toxic chemicals. The new ETH membranes essentially replace these toxic substances with biological keratin.

The researchers are investigating how stable and durable their keratin membrane is and to improve it if necessary. The team has already applied for a joint patent and is looking for partners and investors to further develop the technology and bring it to market.

**********

Web Links

Generating clean electricity with chicken feathers

Photo, posted July 10, 2016, courtesy of Matthew Bellemare via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio

Fake Meat And Climate | Earth Wise

March 10, 2023 By EarthWise 1 Comment

Investors have poured billions of dollars into efforts to replace animal proteins with plant-based substitutes or even laboratory-grown animal cells. Replacing meats with these products is certainly a favorable development for the climate, but it is not likely to offset livestock agriculture’s climate and land use impacts anytime soon.

According to research at Stanford University, even optimistic estimates are that only something like 5% of dietary protein will come from these technologies by 2030. That just isn’t fast enough to put a real dent in the food-related emissions problem.

Stanford environmental scientist David Lobell suggests that there should be much more focus on reducing emissions of animal-based systems. There really hasn’t been much effort in this area because it is only recently that the climate impact of animal agriculture has been a topic of public concern. One problem is that it is difficult for investors to monetize investments in approaches for lowering animal agriculture emissions. These might include alternative feeds or supplements or vaccinations that inhibit methane-producing microorganisms in animals’ digestive systems.

Another approach to the problem is changing the mix of animal proteins in people’s diets. Chicken and pork are half as bad as dairy per pound of protein, and about one-tenth as bad as beef, in terms of emissions.

Dairy is a major issue. There has been quite a lot of progress in increasing the use of dairy-free milk, but over the past 40 years, Americans have cut their consumption of milk in half but doubled their consumption of cheese. Progress in dairy-free cheese has not been anywhere near as successful as that of dairy-free milk. But new products are entering the marketplace all the time.

**********

Web Links

Is fake meat a real solution? Stanford expert explains

Photo, posted June 17, 2019, courtesy of Christolph Scholz via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio

Lab-Grown Meat Is Legal | Earth Wise

December 19, 2022 By EarthWise Leave a Comment

We’ve heard more and more about laboratory meat. Other names for it are cultured meat, cultivated meat, or test tube meat. Whatever name ends up sticking, the idea is to take living cells from animals and grow them in a controlled laboratory environment to produce a meat product that doesn’t involve the slaughter of any animals. Supporters say cultured meat is more efficient and environmentally friendly than traditional livestock. Livestock agriculture is one of the largest emitters of greenhouse gases, uses vast amounts of land, and consumes much of the world’s fresh water.

Years ago, we reported on a company called Memphis Meats, which was one of a number of companies developing techniques for harvesting cells from animal tissues and using them to grow edible flesh in bioreactors.

Recently, that company – now called Upside Foods – has become the first company to receive FDA approval declaring their meat product to be safe for human consumption. The USDA still needs to give its approval and it may be a little while longer before Upside’s first chicken products will end up in supermarkets. There are more than 150 cultivated meat companies around the world backed by billions of dollars in investments. The FDA is in ongoing discussions with multiple firms in the business.

Upside Foods, based in the San Francisco Bay area, is planning to market chicken, beef meatballs, and duck in the near future. Other companies are working on seafood products. Up until now, Singapore has been the only country in which lab-grown meat products are legally sold to consumers. With this landmark FDA ruling, that is all about to change.

**********

Web Links

US declares lab-grown meat safe to eat in ‘groundbreaking’ move

Photo, posted April 15, 2008, courtesy of Andrew Otto via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio

Plant-Based Foods And CO2 Emissions | Earth Wise

September 9, 2022 By EarthWise Leave a Comment

We often hear how eating locally-sourced food is a way to minimize the carbon footprint of our diet. But from a climate impact perspective, this only has a significant impact if transportation is responsible for a large portion of a food’s final carbon footprint. In many cases, the greenhouse gas emissions related to transportation make up only a small portion of the total emissions from food, and what we eat is far more important.

In general, beef and lamb have the biggest climate footprint per gram of protein. Plant-based foods tend to have the smallest impact. Pork and chicken are somewhere in the middle.

According to new research, U.S. food production could reduce its agricultural carbon footprint between 2.5% and 13.5% by embracing plant-based alternatives to beef. The study, from researchers at Cornell University, Johns Hopkins University, and international partners, found that most of the reduction would be achieved by decreasing the number of cows needed for beef production by two to twelve million animals. The research was recently published in the journal Lancet Planetary Health.

However, the researchers also found that acting to reduce climate change in this manner could have unintended consequences. For example, economic models from the research team show that the growth in popularity of plant-based beef could disrupt the agricultural workforce, threatening more than 1.5 million jobs.

But in the big picture, doing nothing will cost much more than doing something to slow climate change. Shifting diets away from meat and other animal products and towards more plant-based foods will help shrink carbon footprints and mitigate climate change. It’s a win-win for the planet and for human health.

**********

Web Links

Plant-based ‘beef’ reduces CO2 but threatens ag jobs

Photo, posted November 27, 2018, courtesy of Sarah Stierch via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

We’re Still Eating The Wrong Things

August 23, 2019 By EarthWise 1 Comment

A new study published in the Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics has found that despite efforts to increase public awareness of health issues related to diet, the amount of processed meat consumed by Americans has remained unchanged in the past 18 years. Furthermore, our intake of fish and shellfish has not increased. One quarter of US adults are still eating more unprocessed read meat than the recommended level, and less than 15% meet the current guidelines for fish and shellfish consumption.

About the only positive note is that Americans are eating less beef and more chicken than they did 18 years ago and, in fact, for the first time, the consumption of poultry exceeds that of unprocessed red meat.

Accumulating evidence has linked excessive consumption of processed meat to increased risk of obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, and some cancers. The study’s authors speculate that public awareness of these linkages is not widespread enough to affect change and, in any case, factors other than health – social, cultural, and economic – have greater influence over Americans’ food choices. The top five consumed processed meats are luncheon meat, sausage, hot dogs, ham, and bacon.

The low consumption of fish and shellfish among U.S. adults could be due to high retail prices, lack of awareness of the health benefits, and concerns about mercury contamination in certain types of fish.

Future research is needed to identify barriers to reducing processed meat consumption and increased seafood consumption. Policies such as nutrition quality standards, excise taxes, health warning labels, and other interventions need to be explored.

**********

Web Links

Americans still eat too much processed meat and too little fish

Photo, posted January 28, 2014, courtesy of Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

Why Choose Chicken Over Beef?

July 22, 2019 By EarthWise Leave a Comment

Food production is a major driver of climate change. It’s responsible for more than a quarter of all greenhouse gas emissions. But the environmental impact of different foods varies greatly, and making seemingly insignificant changes can actually have significant impacts.

According to a first-ever national study of U.S. eating habits and their carbon footprints, choosing chicken over beef will cut your dietary carbon footprint in half.

The National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey asked more than 16,000 participating Americans to name all the foods they consumed in the past 24 hours. The research team then calculated the carbon footprint of what people said they ate. If a respondent consumed broiled beef steak, for example, researchers calculated what the carbon footprint would have been had broiled chicken been consumed instead.

The study’s findings illustrate how making one simple substitution can significantly reduce a person’s dietary carbon footprint. A diet’s carbon footprint is the amount of greenhouse gas emissions that result from the energy, fertilizer, land use, and other inputs necessary to produce food.

In general, animal-based foods have a bigger carbon footprint than plant-based foods. For example, producing beef uses 20 times the land and emits 20 times the emissions as growing beans (per gram of protein), and requires 10 times more resources than producing chicken.

According to the World Resources Institute, keeping the increase in global warming below 2°C will be impossible without limiting the global rise in meat consumption.

Last year, the EAT-Lancet Commission report found that a radical transformation of the global food system was needed because it’s threatening the stability of the climate.

Make a change – big or small – today.

**********

Web Links

Choosing chicken over beef cuts our carbon footprints a surprising amount

Photo, posted August 30, 2011, courtesy of Ken Hawkins via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

Food Production And Climate Change

January 29, 2019 By EarthWise Leave a Comment

According to a University of Oxford study recently published in the journal Science, food production is a major driver of climate change as it’s responsible for 26% of all greenhouse gas emissions. But the research team found that the environmental impact of different foods varied greatly.

Meat and other animal products are responsible for 58% of all food-related greenhouse gas emissions, despite only providing approximately one-fifth of the calories we consume. The researchers found that beef and lamb in particular have the most damaging effect on the planet, responsible for half of all greenhouse gas emissions from animal agriculture.

These findings echo recommendations from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change about how individuals can reduce their carbon footprint through diet. The IPCC suggests we consume less meat and dairy products, consume more locally-sourced seasonal foods, and throw less food in the trash.

Avoiding meat and dairy products can reduce an individual’s carbon footprint from food by two-thirds. The effects of doing so include everything from conserving water and preserving biodiversity to reducing pollution and deforestation.

Interestingly, the same food can have major differences in terms of environmental impacts. For example, beef raised on deforested land is responsible for 12 times as many greenhouse gas emissions as that raised on natural pastures. But even the most climate-friendly meat options are still responsible for more greenhouse gas emissions than the highest-impact vegetable proteins, like beans and nuts.

Big differences can also be made by avoiding chocolate and coffee produced from deforested lands.

To learn more about the climate impact of your diet, follow the link to the ‘Climate Change Food Calculator’ on our website: Earth-Wise-Radio.org.

**********

Web Links

Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers

Climate change food calculator

Photo, posted June 21, 2011, courtesy of USDA NRCS Montana via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

Big Changes To Big Poultry

July 19, 2016 By WAMC WEB

Perdue Farms, the fourth-largest poultry producer in the United States, produces over 60 million pounds of chicken a week. They are arguably the most progressive of the giant poultry companies. Two years ago, they were the first to renounce routine antibiotic use. In late June, they announced a comprehensive animal-welfare plan – the first among large producers – that will change how its chickens are bred, raised and killed.