I'll Have the Marsupial of the Day

Aussies should fight climate change by eating kangaroo, says study

Posted at 10:29 AM on 08 Aug 2008

Australians who want to make a dent in climate change just need to eat more kangaroo, says a new study in the journal Conservation Letters. The methane-producing burps and farts of sheep and cattle contribute 11 percent of Australia's annual greenhouse-gas emissions. Kangaroos, however, emit little methane. Researchers say that 175 million kangaroos could produce the meat of 7 million cattle and 36 million sheep, and a switch-to-roo by 2020 could lower Australia's greenhouse-gas emissions by 3 percent each year. They also note that reducing the number of hard-hoofed livestock tramping around would reduce soil erosion. While some farmers think of 'roos as pests, getting most Aussies on board would require "large cultural and social adjustments and reinvestment," says the study, noting such wee potential problems as "protective legislation and the status of kangaroos as a national icon."

sources: Reuters, The Canberra Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Times

ADVERTISING POLICY

Comments: (8 comments)

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have a Gristmill account, log in below. If you don't have a Gristmill account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

How Lame

What they should be advocating is a large reduction in meat eating. I'm sure the natives ate kangaroos, but their population was much lower and they didn't practice animal husbandry.

by Wolverine at 10:44 AM on 08 Aug 2008

Don't Eat Beef, Eat Wild Game

1.Australia has the same problem with kangaroos that the US has with deer: they hunted the kangaroos natural predators to extinction to protect domesticated animals such as sheep. However, that allowed a giant surge in kangaroo population leading to overpopulation. Overpopulation means that kangaroos are destined to starve. The only humane thing to do is to hunt some kangaroos so that others may live. Eating such as kangaroos in Australia and deer in the United States is a healthier way to consume meat as game animals are higher in protein and lower in fat in cholesterol. Kangaroos aren't ungulates so they don't produce methane gas the way cows do.

2.Eating wild game is the most ecologically friendly way to eat meat. Game animals are adapted to their environment, usually use up less water than cattle, and can subsist on native plant species rather than nonnative feeds such as alfalfa.

3.Animal husbandry uses up too much land, produces air, water, and land pollution. It also puts too much control in the hands of major corporations that own most farms and ranches.

by Cacaoatl at 11:39 PM on 08 Aug 2008

"friendly way to eat meat"?

What frightens me about human beings even more than their blood-thirstiness is their thoughtlessness.

Killing animals for meat is always a serious, ethically fraught business. There is nothing "friendly" about it. Assuming that human beings MUST eat the flesh of non-human animals, and that that justifies their regularly taking the lives of non-human animals -- plus, mocking anyone who might protest -- is an example of terrific thoughtlessness.

Surely the nation of Peter Singer can see that the solution to relying on unsustainable herds of cattle and sheep is NOT to start rounding up kangaroos for the abattoirs, en masse.

Chickens deserve our true friendship! So do fish! So do other sentient beings! Let us learn to be kind.

by caniscandida at 3:02 AM on 09 Aug 2008

Apparently kangaroos are sustainable

And they emit greenhouse gases. What is the problem?

Killing animals for meat is only an ethical question for humans whom don't see themselves as a part of nature.

I am sure they will whisper an Aboriginal prayer of thanks in the ear of each Roo. That should make you happy. Aboriginal spiritualism is to be applauded, unlike Christianity. Unless they are African-American Christians, of course. Then that is fine. Quaint, really.

"...a 90 percent chance that the US has contributed .2 degrees F of temperature increase in the last 50 years..." The IPCC Consensus in perspective

by Paleocon at 7:55 PM on 10 Aug 2008
[ Parent ]

A choice

It's still more effective to eat no meat than it is to eat kangaroo meat. Plus, I'd say for many people it's probably easier to abstain from meat altogether than to replace beef with kangaroo. I mean, that's just my guess.

by askantik at 10:28 AM on 11 Aug 2008

not even a half-solution

Simply replacing meat with fruits, vegetables, and grains will make the average diet much more sustainable (without having to kill and slaughter animals). There's no need to eat kangaroos!

http://www.biteglobalwarming.org/

The other impact of a meatless diet is that healthcare costs will plummet as people "cure themselves" of diseases associated with meat consumption (colon cancer, osteoporosis, diabetes, etc, etc). I wonder if anyone has calculated the carbon footprint from cardiologists' Austrian ski vacations!

by sje333 at 10:50 AM on 11 Aug 2008

Natural Balance

Cacaoatl,

Since we agree that animal husbandry should be eliminated, why not put back the native predators instead of slaughtering the native prey? Or, if the native predators are extinct, which they are not in the U.S., then, replace them with something as similar as possible?

Hunting/gathering is not at all sustainable with anywhere near the current human population. We need to first greatly reduce that population before everyone can become hunter-gatherers. (While Australia is nowhere near as overpopulated as China, India, or the U.S., it's still way above the population that existed before the Europeans invaded.) A much better solution would be a vegan diet with occasional kangaroo or fish for vitamin B-12.

by Wolverine at 12:25 PM on 11 Aug 2008

My study concludes

Humans who want to make a dent in climate change just "need to eat more humans".

The burps and farts of these methane-producing beasts must be curtailed and eating these animals would also provide "substantial conservation benefits".

These dumb creatures run rampant, destroying habitats, over consumming without consideration and proliferating without control.

So next time you see one in the wild, gun it down and bring it home for the whole family to enjoy.
But remember these thick skinned creatures need extra time in the stewing pot..

by sayno2gm at 5:09 AM on 12 Aug 2008

The comments of Grist users reflect the opinions of those individuals only, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoints of Grist, its staff, its board members, their psychotherapists, or their aestheticians. Got it?