Grassfed beef generally produces more carbon than it sequesters, according to a report by Oxford University’s Food Climate Research Network.
Proponents of grassfed beef have argued that ruminants like cows can have positive effects on rangeland if they’re encouraged to move across the landscape, rather than being left to overgraze a particular area. The animals’ eating habits and the pressure from their hooves can encourage deeper root growth and thus greater carbon sequestration by grasses, explains Grist.
But while FCRN’s report, “Grazed and Confused?” says that cattle can sequester more carbon than they produce in some places and under certain soil and weather conditions, most of the time, that’s not the case. The report found that most grassfed beef operations produce more carbon than feedlot beef. “Increasing grass-fed ruminant numbers is, therefore, a self-defeating climate strategy,” according to the report.
However, the study’s authors add that carbon impact is only one element in evaluating the sustainability of grassfed beef. Other factors include plant biodiversity and conservation of rangelands, as well as the livelihoods of rural men and women around the world — all of which may arguably benefit from having cattle on the landscape.