“People can eat whale meat with a good conscience,” says Rune Frovik of the High North Alliance, which has conducted the study.
Norway and Japan, the two main whaling nations, are seeking new arguments to promote whale meat after years of condemnation from anti-whaling nations for breaking with a 1986 moratorium on all hunts meant to save many whale species from extinction.
The study compared the carbon foot print of Norwegian minke whale meat and farm raised meat. It found that the carbon foot print of beef was eight times higher than that of whale meat. “Put simply, one meal of beef emits the same amount of greenhouse gases as eight meals of whale meat,” says Frovik.
When expressing greenhouse gas emissions as CO2 equivalents, whale meat ends up with 1.9 kg per CO2 equivalents while the corresponding values are 17.4 for lamb, 15.8 for beef, 6.4 for pork and 4.6 for chicken.
The CO2 equivalents for other types of meat were done through other studies.
Greenpeace said the threat of extinction was more important.
"The survival of a species is more important than lower greenhouse gas emissions from eating it," said Truls Gulowsen of Greenpeace. "Almost every food is more climate friendly than meat.
Most fish and seafood has similarly low emissions."
The High North Alliance has for years argued that abundant whale stocks make whale meat a sustainable and ecological sound option. International scientists estimate that there are more than 100,000 minke whales in the areas where the Norwegian commercial whale hunt takes place.
“Now it is also confirmed that whale meat is low carbon and good for the climate,” Frovik says.
A transfer to green taxes in which the real costs associated with climate change emissions are incorporated in the real consumer prices may strengthen the economic competition of low-carbon items.
“With increasing environmental awareness, coupled with abundant whale stocks, the future for whaling looks bright,” he says.
Further information:
Study on the carbon foot print of whale meat
