Is grass-fed beef sustainable?
The short answer
Not in the way the claim suggests. Grazing can store some soil carbon, but reviews find it offsets only a fraction of cattle's own emissions, and only temporarily. Grass-fed beef usually has higher emissions per kg than grain-finished beef.
- Published
- Last reviewed
- Reviewer
- Editorial placeholder
- Status
- sample
Sample data. The figures and sources on this page are demonstration records showing how evidence will be presented. They are approximate and have not yet been through our review process. Read about how we will verify evidence.
The claim
“Grass-fed cattle graze naturally, store carbon in the soil, and can be carbon-neutral or even carbon-negative.”
Why this question comes up
- Grazing looks natural, and pasture is greener than a feedlot.
- Some well-publicised farms report that their soils are gaining carbon.
- The idea that a traditional way of farming could fix a modern problem is appealing.
What the evidence says
A major 2017 review of the evidence, 'Grazed and Confused', concluded that grazing systems could at best offset around 20 to 60% of their own emissions through soil carbon, and that this potential fades as soils reach saturation.
Grass-fed cattle take longer to reach slaughter weight and produce more methane over their lives, so life-cycle assessments generally find higher emissions per kg of grass-fed beef than for grain-finished.
A 2021 synthesis of beef life-cycle assessments found that improved grazing can reduce net emissions, but that even the best-performing systems remain well above plant proteins.Source 1: Grazed and Confused? Ruminating on cattle, grazing systems, methane, nitrous oxide, the soil carbon sequestration questionSource 2: Reducing climate impacts of beef production: a synthesis of life cycle assessments across management systems and global regionsSource 3: Reducing food's environmental impacts through producers and consumers
Weighing the claim
What is true about the claim
- Well-managed grazing can increase soil carbon, especially on degraded land.
- Grazing can maintain grassland habitats and can use land unsuitable for crops.
- Grass-fed systems often score better on animal welfare and on avoiding feed crops.
What may be misleading
- Soil carbon gains saturate after a few decades and are reversed if management changes, whereas methane emissions continue every year.
- Results from individual farms are often measured over short periods and not representative of what could be achieved at scale.
- Grass-fed beef needs far more land per kg than grain-finished beef; scaling it up globally would require converting forest or other habitat.
What remains uncertain
- The size of soil carbon gains in different climates and soils, which studies measure with wide error margins.
- Whether some specific regenerative systems on already-degraded land perform better than the averages suggest.
Bottom line
Grass-fed beef can be better than feedlot beef on land quality and welfare, but it is not a low-carbon food. Its emissions per kg are similar to or higher than conventional beef, and many times those of plant proteins.
Evidence strength
Why this rating: Reviews agree on the direction, but soil carbon estimates carry wide uncertainty and depend on local conditions.
Supported by good-quality studies that point the same way, but with gaps: fewer studies, mostly observational data, or some inconsistency.
Claims behind this answerEach claim has its own record with rating, methodology and sources.
Well-managed grazing can store some carbon in soil, but not enough to offset cattle's own emissions, and grass-fed beef generally has higher emissions per kg than grain-finished beef.
Better, in some ways, but not low-impact. Soil carbon gains are real, limited, and temporary.
Per gram of protein, beef from dedicated beef herds produces roughly 25 to 60 times the greenhouse gas emissions of beans, peas or tofu.
Beef is in a different league from plant proteins on emissions. Chicken and eggs sit in between.
Sources
Each source links to our record of what it found, its limitations and what we used it for, with a link to the original.
- 1Grazed and Confused? Ruminating on cattle, grazing systems, methane, nitrous oxide, the soil carbon sequestration question
Tara Garnett, Cécile Godde, et al. (2017). Food Climate Research Network, University of Oxford.
- 2Reducing climate impacts of beef production: a synthesis of life cycle assessments across management systems and global regions
Daniela Cusack, et al. (2021). Global Change Biology.
- 3Reducing food's environmental impacts through producers and consumers
Joseph Poore, Thomas Nemecek (2018). Science.