Fixing potatoes and Rice? (environmental impact)

Vegan message board for support on vegan related issues and questions.
Topics include philosophy, activism, effective altruism, plant-based nutrition, and diet advice/discussion whether high carb, low carb (eco atkins/vegan keto) or anything in between.
Meat eater vs. Vegan debate welcome, but please keep it within debate topics.
User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 10273
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Diet: Vegan

Fixing potatoes and Rice? (environmental impact)

Post by brimstoneSalad »

Potatoes and rice both have amazing yield, but are among the worst grains/starches for the environment in practice.

For rice, it's the methane production. When the fields are flooded, the roots release starches which decompose anaerobically to form methane.
There are some genetic engineering solutions on the horizon, but I don't know when those will go mainstream.
There may be some farming practices to reduce it too, but I don't know if any of that rice is available.

For potatoes, it's the storage. No idea how to get around that, since they have to be carefully climate controlled in order to prevent mold (since they are not dry goods). Massive amounts of energy spent on air conditioning and controlling humidity in these warehouses.

Has anybody read about or heard of solutions to these that are currently available or may be soon?
User avatar
ModVegan
Full Member
Posts: 123
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 12:01 pm
Diet: Vegan
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Contact:

Re: Fixing potatoes and Rice? (environmental impact)

Post by ModVegan »

While I think we could stand to improve methane emissions from rice, rice produces 12% of the world's methane emissions (not sure if I'm allowed to post links, but the information is available on nasa.gov). Rice makes up 50% of the calories consumed by the people of the world, whereas all meat makes up only 9% of the calories (national geographic has an infographic on this).

So yes, rice contributes to methane emissions (mostly due to global warming), but when you consider how many calories of food are being grown compared to beef - well, there's no comparison. Grains - even rice - are still the most environmentally friendly food source, even when you take into account methane.
User avatar
ModVegan
Full Member
Posts: 123
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 12:01 pm
Diet: Vegan
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Contact:

Re: Fixing potatoes and Rice? (environmental impact)

Post by ModVegan »

Oh, just had to add that, as for potatoes, sure, they're less environmentally friendly for commercial storage than dry goods, but they are vastly more friendly per calorie than produce (aside from apples). So they aren't perfect, but unless you eat a diet solely consisting of dried beans and grains, potatoes (also a source of vitamin c) are no worse than any other fresh produce on the planet, and a good deal better since they are more shelf-stable than any other fruits or vegetables, aside from maybe apples and oranges ;)
User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 10273
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: Fixing potatoes and Rice? (environmental impact)

Post by brimstoneSalad »

ModVegan wrote:While I think we could stand to improve methane emissions from rice, rice produces 12% of the world's methane emissions (not sure if I'm allowed to post links, but the information is available on nasa.gov). Rice makes up 50% of the calories consumed by the people of the world, whereas all meat makes up only 9% of the calories (national geographic has an infographic on this).
You can link to things using the "clickylink" button at the top with the formatting stuff.

Code: Select all

[clickylink]linkgoeshere[/clickylink]
That's a very strong argument for beef, perhaps. But not so much for chicken and some other meats (which cause more animal harm).

Even for beef, we're only looking at a bit over a five times margin. It doesn't make me comfortable choosing rice over wheat pasta if I have the choice. There's even Orzo, which basically looks like rice.

I guess we have to ask ourselves where the line is and what's practical in our lives. I don't totally avoid rice and potatoes, but my diet is mostly bean and grain based (minimizing rice and potatoes).

I'd love to include more potatoes particularly, but I'm wondering if there's a way to do it with lower impact.
User avatar
ModVegan
Full Member
Posts: 123
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 12:01 pm
Diet: Vegan
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Contact:

Re: Fixing potatoes and Rice? (environmental impact)

Post by ModVegan »

I think it's admirable that you want to do something about it, and I'm sure that efforts can be made to reduce any environmental impact that rice has.

That said, any food that provides 50% of the world's calories will have a serious environmental impact. Think about it - it wheat provided half the worlds food supply, there would likely be all sorts of unforeseen consequences for that crop as well. I'm pretty comfortable eating rice while we work on solving the problem. If animal agriculture, which only gives us 9% of our calories, causes half of the world's greenhouse gas emissions - it gives you some idea how much less harmful rice is.

So rice isn't perfect, but if a meat-eater brought it up in an argument "well you eat RICE so how can you criticize me for eating meat" - I'm pretty confident I could still destroy them with the logic that it's still orders of magnitude less harmful than beef, lol ;).

Also, from the sounds of the information I read about rice and methane, all that would be required to pretty much eliminate methane emissions from rice would be a variety designed for colder climates/raising rice in slightly colder climates. Which may be either less or more complicated than it sounds, but it still seems far from impossible.

And unless you flagellate yourself for consuming lettuce (which has a shorter shelf-life and far fewer calories than potatoes, and has been shown - though dubiously, I'll admit - to be less environmentally friendly than bacon), I don't think you should feel bad about potatoes. If all vegans ever ate was lentils, then WE would become the greatest source of methane emissions on the planet, hehe (I'm kidding - or am I?) :lol: :lol:
User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 10273
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: Fixing potatoes and Rice? (environmental impact)

Post by brimstoneSalad »

ModVegan wrote:I think it's admirable that you want to do something about it, and I'm sure that efforts can be made to reduce any environmental impact that rice has.
If the methane emissions are lower in colder climates (how much, and how do yields compare?), that might be an option. Like buying Canadian grown rice and avoiding that grown in warmer regions?
But then water use is also a major concern.
ModVegan wrote:That said, any food that provides 50% of the world's calories will have a serious environmental impact. Think about it - it wheat provided half the worlds food supply, there would likely be all sorts of unforeseen consequences for that crop as well.
That's true, but it's the proportional impact I'm concerned about mainly: impact per calorie. If wheat is the better option there, it makes sense to eat Orzo instead of rice, as long as I'm not gluten intolerant. It seems easy enough to do.
ModVegan wrote:If animal agriculture, which only gives us 9% of our calories, causes half of the world's greenhouse gas emissions - it gives you some idea how much less harmful rice is.
That's quite an if. Those cowspiracy numbers are pretty questionable.

I talked about an article here on it:
http://philosophicalvegan.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=2167

Here's a direct link: http://www.vegan.com/articles/environment/a-sympathetic-but-skeptical-look-at-goodland-and-anhangs-livestock-and-climate-change/

I'm not even sure we can go by 30%, although that seems more plausible. It could be down to around 15% or so, in line with official estimates.
That's still very large. We need to eliminate most sources of greenhouse gas in order to have a hope of reversing global warming before there are catastrophic consequences.

It makes sense to give up animal products for environmental reasons, but if rice is such a close second in terms of harm per calorie, doesn't it make sense to switch it out for something better? And it might not even be second to factory farmed chicken (despite being the highest in cruelty), since they don't produce as much methane, have a higher FCR, and are fed on largely corn.

Beans as a replacement for meat are a huge improvement, since beans are one of the most efficient and sustainable crops in the world.
How does wheat compare to rice (or potatoes) as a staple?

ModVegan wrote:So rice isn't perfect, but if a meat-eater brought it up in an argument "well you eat RICE so how can you criticize me for eating meat" - I'm pretty confident I could still destroy them with the logic that it's still orders of magnitude less harmful than beef, lol ;).
But what if it's only five times better than eating beef, and it's the same as chicken?

Sources like this ( http://www.greeneatz.com/foods-carbon-footprint.html ) which are common across the net only show rice and potatoes as a little less than half the output per kg than chicken, and 10% compared to beef. It's not clear if that's dried or prepared (it's probably dry).
But prepared rice has only about half the calories per kilogram, and something like 10% of the protein compared to chicken.

Thanks to that methane output, calorie per calorie, it could be the same as chicken. Since the numbers quoted are probably dry, it's probably still better (about twice as good), but it's an important question to ask.

There are people making anti-vegan arguments by looking at the damage of crops like these:
http://philosophicalvegan.com/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=1185
And they're arguments people find pretty compelling.
ModVegan wrote:And unless you flagellate yourself for consuming lettuce (which has a shorter shelf-life and far fewer calories than potatoes, and has been shown - though dubiously, I'll admit - to be less environmentally friendly than bacon), I don't think you should feel bad about potatoes. If all vegans ever ate was lentils, then WE would become the greatest source of methane emissions on the planet, hehe (I'm kidding - or am I?) :lol: :lol:
Lettuce is a vegetable; it's categorically different. It's used as more as a garnish and a source of certain micro nutrients, not as a source of calories or protein.

When we compare meat and beans, we're making a sound comparison of two protein sources.
When we compare rice or potatoes to wheat or oats or even corn, we're comparing starch/staple sources.

I would feel bad if I ate enough lettuce (or other store bought veggies) to be a significant source of calories. I think diets like that Emily of Bite Size Vegan demonstrated are probably worse for the environment than the standard American diet. Not that they're more harmful to animals, though.

A few vegetables are good for us, more is not necessarily better and definitely not better for the environment when compared to dry staples.

Where do we draw the line of having done enough?
And particularly where environment is concerned, any line we try to draw between factory farmed chicken and a substantial number of calories from rice/potatoes seems very tricky. I like a larger margin than that.

When it comes to the ethical argument for avoiding cruelty to animals, it's a fine argument to make. But it becomes weaker from an environmental perspective.
Cirion Spellbinder
Master of the Forum
Posts: 1008
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2015 10:28 pm
Diet: Vegan
Location: Presumably somewhere

Re: Fixing potatoes and Rice? (environmental impact)

Post by Cirion Spellbinder »

Does Orzo taste like rice? I don't eat rice everyday, but it's incredibly useful as a base for lots of foods that I eat (curry, stir fry, beans, etc.).
User avatar
EquALLity
I am God
Posts: 3022
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 11:31 am
Diet: Vegan
Location: United States of Canada

Re: Fixing potatoes and Rice? (environmental impact)

Post by EquALLity »

Cirion Spellbinder wrote:Does Orzo taste like rice? I don't eat rice everyday, but it's incredibly useful as a base for lots of foods that I eat (curry, stir fry, beans, etc.).
Orzo is pasta in the shape of rice. I think it's a good replacement.
"I am not a Marxist." -Karl Marx
User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 10273
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: Fixing potatoes and Rice? (environmental impact)

Post by brimstoneSalad »

Cirion Spellbinder wrote:Does Orzo taste like rice? I don't eat rice everyday, but it's incredibly useful as a base for lots of foods that I eat (curry, stir fry, beans, etc.).
If your dish is strongly flavored, you probably won't notice the difference.

I've never found whole wheat Orzo, though, so I just use other pasta since it's cheaper anyway (not that white pasta isn't as healthy as rice, it probably is).
Technically you could probably cut whole wheat spaghetti up into little pieces. I don't care enough about the shape. so I just use whatever.

Curry, stir fry, and bean dishes all go well on plain spaghetti (or whatever shape, macaroni, etc.) too. Seems strange at first, but it's so bland you don't notice it.

Flat bread is even traditional for curry. I love pita. It's not too hard to make at home. And if you do Mexican style beans, a wheat or corn tortilla is a good option... that's less easy to make at home.

Corn has excellent yield. Not great nutritionally, but a very efficient source of calories.

Quinoa is another option which is finally getting cheaper, since it's being grown more widely and larger companies have picked up production.
Large parts of Europe, and now some areas of Canada, are growing some.
http://spendmatters.com/2015/04/27/quinoa-prices-fall-finally-due-to-rise-in-production/

I don't know what the environmental pressure of that is on South America. I'm sure it has resulted in deforestation, but it also has a much larger potential growing range than something like palm since it's a cooler weather plant.
Yields aren't great either, getting around 550 to 910 kg per acre, which is around a third of wheat.

I would probably eat it more if I were allergic/intolerant to wheat now that the price is coming down and cultivation is growing.

I know there are other options too, but I'm not as familiar with them.
User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 10273
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: Fixing potatoes and Rice? (environmental impact)

Post by brimstoneSalad »

Here's a question I have:

Powdered potatoes/potato flour/instant mashed potatoes.

Do these have the carbon footprint from storage and transit that others do, or do they just wash them and dry/grind (or grind then dry) them?
These may be a good option for potato if they circumvent the energy intensive storage.
Post Reply