Steele 1

Nina Steele

Professor Toole

ENC 1102

10 April 2017

How Your Plate Impacts the Environment

Most people do not think twice when ordering a big juicy hamburger, however their meal

is not only costing money, but the health of the planet as well. New scientific research is

showing that decreasing the production of meat, or ending it all together can significantly aid the

effort of revitalizing the planet. Although there are various reasons as to why the planets health

has increasingly gotten worse, cows have been proven to be the main culprit because of how

resource intensive cattle farming is, the high emission of methane gas they produce, and because

of where their waste ends up. Humans are only given one beautiful planet that provides them

with everything they need in order to sustain life, so it is about time people begin to take of it.

Cattle farming is actually a lot more resource intensive than people may think. The

monetary cost of a burger may be $6, however the actual cost is about four hundred forty gallons

of water, seventy kilograms of emitted methane, and one cows life (Motevalli). In fact, [c]attle

agriculture is by far the largest consumer of freshwater and a whopping, 70% of

freshwatergo[es] to irrigated [cattle] farming ("Climate Change and Water." ). If society

would decrease their meat consumption, even by just a small amount that would tremendously

help conserve water in places such as California where drought is ongoing.

Some critics of this idea believe that although cattle and agricultural farming are resource

intensive now, in the future new technologies will change all of that. Farmers and

environmentalists are pushing for the widespread use of hydroponic farming which is, an
 Steele 2

agricultural practice that uses nutrient-rich recirculating water as a sustainable way to grow food.

These energy- and water-efficient farming methodsproduce plantsin contained systems.

Their unique design and function minimizes and eliminates use of antibiotics, genetic

modification or chemicals while also tapping into natural processes, promoting faster plant

growth in far less space than many farming methods ("Why the USDA). This new farming

method has caught the attention of many and seems like a great solution to farming because of

its, less negative impact on the natural environment (Why the USDA). Although this new

farming technique conserves water more efficiently than prior techniques, it is only reducing the

amount of water going into producing the feed for cows. As a result water consumption will not

be as high in order to produce the beef, but it will still be the higher option than if people just ate

vegetables and grain.

Similarly, others argue that there are other ways to conserve water such as changing

shower nozzles and taking shorter showers. The issue with this though is that, [in order t]o

produce 1 lb. of feedlot beef requires 7 lbs. of feed grain, which takes 7,000 lbs. of water to

grow. Pass up one hamburger, and you'll save as much water as you save by taking 40 showers

with a low-flow nozzle (Ayers). The future of the planet and its freshwater supply does not lie

in the hands of low-flow shower nozzles and sink facets, it depends on those inhabiting the

Earth. If people want to change the course of destruction the planet is currently on, they are

better off altering their diet once or twice a week than having shorter showers. When taking

water consumption into consideration and comparing the amount a person would save by taking

shorter showers or by eating less beef, it is unquestionable as to which is the better option for the

planet.
 Steele 3

In addition to beef production using vast amounts of water, cattle farming also requires

more and more land as the demand for meat in the growing world continues to skyrocket.

Although cows graze on land that is unsuitable for cultivation, the demand for meat has

taken millions of productive acres away from farm inventories [and t]he cost of that is

incalculable (Pacheco). The main area cattle farming is impacting the most though is the

beautiful Amazonian rainforest. New evidence is unfortunately showing that, [an]

overwhelming majority of the forest area lost in the Brazilian Amazon eventually becomes

pasture and that in the last twelve years, the number of cattle more than doubled, from 26

millionto 57 million (Pacheco).

Critics of the idea that cattle farming is the main, or major reason for deforestation in the

Amazon argue that there are other factors such as logging. The issue with this claim is that,

[l]ogging rarely leads directly to deforestation in the Amazon and that although it, often

damages the forest, it does not destroy it (Pacheco). Logging is not entirely harmless to the

environment though because it makes it, easier for forests to catch fire and for farmers to

move into forested areas, [h]owever, logging [has proven to be] much less damaging than the

growth of cattle ranching (Pacheco). The solution to this issue is factory farming and it

solves the deforestation crisis somewhat, however it has led to a laundry list of many other

and more threatening issues.

A huge issue that factory farming has created is that animals living in closer quarters take

up less land, however their waste is not being distributed or disposed of correctly. Although

critics may argue that ocean contamination comes from a contemplation of various sources

such as oil spills, garbage dumping, and sewage, factory farming has proven to be the biggest

culprit of ocean pollution. As explained by the Humane Society International:

 Steele 4

Factory farm animal waste, which is stored in lagoons or pits, contains chemical

contaminants as well as numerous pathogens. Potentially contaminating water,

soil, and air, factory farms typically spray minimally treated or untreated waste on

fields. Manure storage lagoons can also overflow. Pathogens from the manure

may end up in surface water, and nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorous can

leach into groundwater and run off of fields. Waste storage and application also

emit carbon dioxide, hydrogen sulfide, ammonia, methane, and particulates into

the atmosphere. Nitrogen can also volatilize into ammonia emissions that are then

redeposited into waterways. In fact, according to the FAO, "[t]he livestock sector

... is probably the largest sectoral source of water pollution, contributing to

eutrophication, 'dead' zones in coastal areas, degradation of coral reefs, human

health problems, emergence of antibiotic resistance and many others."

Not only is their waste ruining the ocean, the amount of waste going into the water is immense.

As explained by Motavalli, livestock raised for food produce 130 times the excrement of the

human population, some 87,000 pounds per second. People may not be seeing this impact

personally however, in populous areas their waste is tainting drinking water (Ayres). Their

waste is not only damaging the ocean, but also soiling peoples drinking water. If this is what is

currently happening, imagine what will occur over time if this does not get fixed.

The waste of cows not only leads to water pollution, but air pollution as well. The

feeding of livestock, and their resulting manure, contributes to a variety of environmental

problems, including GHG emissions (Climate Change). Factory farming is a solution to

deforestation, but it still not a solution for greenhouse gas emission. Livestock are also

responsible for almost two-thirds (64 per cent) of anthropogenic [human-caused] emissions
 Steele 5

(Climate Change). Livestock is responsible for over half the worlds greenhouse gas

emissiontake a moment to reflect on that. More than half of the worlds greenhouse gases

come from cows. People continuously put environmental focus on taking shorter showers,

driving less, finding renewable energy sources, and recycling, however the differences those

efforts make do not even come close to undoing the environmental damages cattle farming

causes. If this still does not move those who are hopeful of a clean bright future for the

generations who will inhabit this Earth after we are all dead then I dont know what will. It

has been proven that, [a]griculture, through meat production, is one of the main contributors

to the emission of greenhouse gases, and that they cause the most emission of all animals

because, they are the most numerous and have a much larger body size relative to other

species such as sheep and goats (United Nations). This proves that because cows are the

biggest contributor, it makes the most sense to limit the amount of beef produced in order to

help the environment. In addition, it also proves that "beef is the least [environmentally]

efficient way to produce protein when plants can be used instead who produce little to no

greenhouse gas emission (Motavalli).

In the end, people who are advocates for the environment should begin to focus less of

their attention on their recycling bins and more attention on their plates. Cows have been

proven to be one of the worst sources of food when it comes to the environment because of

how resource intensive it is to produce beef for a few people when vegetables and grains use

less water and feed many more. In addition to using excess resources, cows also produce

excess waste which is threatening the health of the beautiful ocean and clean drinking water.

How important is it to you to make sure you are not drinking cow excrements? Also,

greenhouse gases are one of the main causes of climate change which poses a serious threat
 Steele 6

to the health of the planet. With evidence pointing to cows as the highest source of

greenhouse gas emission, it only makes sense to reduce the amount of meat being consumed

in order to preserve the environment. Although there are many solutions to the

environmental concerns cows raise, most of them either slightly help the problem or cause an

even bigger one. If people want their future generations to enjoy the same beautiful Earth

there currently is, then it is time to make changes starting with their plates.
 Steele 7

Works Cited

Ayres, Ed. "Livestock Agriculture Depletes Land Resources." Global Resources, edited by Helen

Cothran, Greenhaven Press, 2004. Opposing Viewpoints. Opposing Viewpoints in

Context, db29.linccweb.org/login?url=http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/EJ3010139241

/OVIC?u=lincclin_vcc&xid=8d109101. Accessed 6 Apr. 2017. Originally published as

"Will We Still Eat Meat? Maybe Not, If We Wake Up to What the Mass Production of

Animal Flesh Is Doing to Our HealthAnd the Planet's," Time, vol. 154, 8 Nov. 1999, p.

106.

"Climate Change and Water." Adaptation and Climate Change, edited by Roman Espejo,

Greenhaven Press, 2013. At Issue. Opposing Viewpoints in Context, Accessed 9 Apr.

2017. Originally published as "3. Responses to Climate Change Must Focus on

Water," Climate Change and Water, 2009.

Humane Society International. "Concentrated Animal Agriculture Is the Biggest Threat to the

Environment and Biodiversity." Biodiversity, edited by Debra A. Miller, Greenhaven

Press, 2013. Current Controversies. Opposing Viewpoints in Context, Accessed 10 Apr.

2017. Originally published as "HSI Fact Sheet: The Impact of Animal Agriculture on the

Environment and Climate Change in Brazil,", 3 Feb. 2011.

Motavalli, Jim. "Reducing Meat Consumption Will Help Conserve the

Environment." Conserving the Environment, edited by Douglas Dupler, Greenhaven

Press, 2006. Opposing Viewpoints. Opposing Viewpoints in Context, Accessed 5 Apr.

2017. Originally published as "The Case against Meat," E/The Environmental Magazine,

vol. 13, Jan.-Feb. 2002.

 Steele 8

Pacheco, Pablo, et al. "Cattle Ranching Is Destroying Brazil's Rain Forest." Rain Forests, edited

by Stuart A. Kallen, Greenhaven Press, 2006. At Issue. Opposing Viewpoints in Context,

Accessed 8 Apr. 2017. Originally published as "Hamburger Connection Fuels Amazon

Destruction: Cattle Ranching and Deforestation in Brazil's Amazon," www.cifor.org, Apr.

2004.

United Nations Global Environmental Alert Service. "Meat Production Is a Major Contributor to

Climate Change." The Environment, edited by Lynn M. Zott, Greenhaven Press, 2014.

Opposing Viewpoints. Opposing Viewpoints in Context, Accessed 7 Apr. 2017.

Originally published as "Growing Greenhouse Gas Emissions Due to Meat Production,",

Oct. 2012.

"Why the USDA should say yes to hydroponic farmers." CNN Wire, 18 Nov. 2016. Opposing

Viewpoints in Context, Accessed 9 Apr. 2017.