Latest news with #grassfed
Telegraph
15-05-2025
- General
- Telegraph
The best and worst supermarket salted butter
Remember the fuss a couple of years ago when the average cost of a block of butter hit an all time high of £2.36? The nation was in shock as 750g of Lurpak spreadable soared to £7 and security stickers started to appear on the silver and blue boxes. Well, that same Lurpak tub now costs £8.25, and after a brief price drop last year, the average 250g block of butter costs £2.41. Lurpak butter – the real stuff, not spreadable, which is butter blended with rapeseed oil – was £2.15 for 200g just 18 months ago. Now it is £2.80, up 30 per cent. Even supermarket own brands have been hit, up from around £1.69 to £1.99, a rise of 18 per cent. All this is bad news for fans of the 'butter diet', the latest loony fad to emerge from the reductivism of social media which involves snacking on slabs of butter straight from the pack. But for those of us who love butter for spreading and cooking, high prices mean it's worth being extra careful which pack you pick up. There's certainly plenty of choice. Sticking to salted butter, I found 42 kinds in the supermarkets. How different could they be? Quite a bit it turned out. Producers tweak the texture and melting point of butter by adjusting the diet of the cows. Entirely grass-fed cows produce milk and cream that is generally higher in unsaturated fat. Other cattle may be given feed supplements containing extra fat – sometimes palm oil – that boosts the fat content in the milk, and often increases the proportion of saturated fat. This makes for a harder butter – useful for pastry but less good for those watching their saturated fat intake. Flavours varied from milky – an indication of 'sweet cream' butter, made without fermentation – to distinctly cheesy, meaning they are made with a bacterial culture similar to the kinds added to cheese or yogurt. The salt, usually about 1.5 per cent but sometimes as much as 4 per cent, might be evenly incorporated or, in the posher butters, left as crunchy crystals. But posh or not, there's plenty of good stuff to eat with your toast – or even without. How we tested A slice was cut from each of the 42 blocks of butter and labelled from A-Z and 1-16 to anonymise the samples. They were then given 30 minutes to come to an internal temperature of approximately 18C. The butters were tasted on a spoon, judging for texture and flavour. At a glance
Forbes
07-05-2025
- Science
- Forbes
Could Sustainably-Farmed Cows Be Part Of The Climate Change Solution?
Herd of Hereford beef cattle in the English landscape, Cumbria, UK. (Photo by: Farm Images/Universal ... More Images Group via Getty Images) Universal Images Group via Getty Images Grass-fed cows and sheep can be part of the solution to climate change, provided farmers move to more circular and less intensive way of working, according to a new analysis. The new study by the Sustainable Food Trust challenges the popular view that cattle are often part of the problem when it comes to climate change, and instead highlights the environmental benefits of cows raised on grass, without fertilizers or chemicals. It argues regenerative farming systems depend on crop rotations with grasses and legumes that naturally improve soil health. The report also claims moving to low-input, pasture-based grazing systems would help reverse the enormous loss of biodiversity that has occurred across U.K. arable and improved grassland areas over the past century. And it says grazing is also essential for the conservation of important habitats and species and can even play a central role in rewilding projects. Trust founder and chief executive Patrick Holden said the prevailing wisdom that cattle are part of the problem when it comes to climate change is 'flawed' in an interview. He said previous calculations failed to take into account the umbilical interrelationship between cows and the soils underneath them. He told me that with the right grazing systems soil carbon sequestration can more than offset the emissions of animals like cows and sheep. Holden added the prevailing orthodoxy was first challenged by Professor Myles Allen from Oxford University, who identified flaws in the way methane from cows had been calculated, which undermine the potentially positive contribution that the livestock sector can make. 'It's not the cow, but the how,' said Holden. 'If the farming systems which currently predominate throughout the U.K. and the world continue, then we will not be able to claim that the cow could be part of the solution. 'These systems are extracting soil carbon, using very large quantities of nitrogen fertilizer and other chemical inputs, which are very carbon heavy,' added Holden. 'In order to make cows part of the solution, you have to move to a system called mixed farming, which is based on a crop rotation to build up the fertility of the soil.' Dr. Catherine Broomfield, from the Centre for Rural Policy Research at the University of Exeter, said the debate about agriculture and climate change has tended to focus on a narrow set of metrics in an interview. Dr. Broomfield added farming is a system and like any system it is complex and in the case of farming, highly place specific. For this reason, she said it is important the public and policy debate moves away from focusing on one aspect, such as methane emissions, when trying to make a meaningful assessment as to whether cattle and sheep farming is a good or bad thing for people and the planet. She added both farming practices and the location where cattle are being farmed both need to be taken into account when estimating environmental impacts. 'If you just take just the U.K. the climate here allows us to grow naturally rain-fed grass in abundance, so for many farms it is possible to produce beef from a pasture-based system with no or very little supplementary grain-based feed,' Dr. Broomfield told me. 'And we often forget what's underneath our feet,' she added. 'Long-term permanent pasture grassland that has not been ploughed ever or for several decades, is a massive store of carbon. 'We also know that incorporating short-term pasture into the arable crop rotation, that are then grazed by cattle and sheep is very good for re-building soil health, including soil organic carbon and enabling the soil to sequester even more carbon. 'It also reduces the need for synthetic fertiliser and herbicides which is good for soil and all other living things'. 'Place-appropriate pasture-based cattle and sheep farming can be an incredibly important part of building a sustainable, healthy food system for everyone.' Professor Benjamin Selwyn from the University of Sussex said the report makes a 'useful contribution to the discussion' around the future of agriculture and food systems in an interview. But Professor Selwyn added questions remain about how such a move would encourage people to move to more sustainable diets. He also said there also needs to be more 'radical action' and financial support from central government to help the beleaguered British farming sector. 'While the notion we can move towards regenerative agriculture and adopt more agroecological ways of producing meat is a step in the right direction, we need many more rapid steps in that direction,' he added.
