Consumption of the Earth? Mmm, Tastes Like Chicken.

The meat industry’s factory farms are some of the most notorious culprits of ecological havoc. Agriculture in general is one of the most environmentally damaging aspects of industrialized living, and the reality of these resource-intensive and waste-generating habits are only exaggerated in meat production. Even for those of us who don’t consider ourselves “green” enough to care about ecological issues are beginning to become aware of the necessity to change. And if we are putting effort into any number of current concerns - driving more efficient cars, finding cleaner energy, using less water, consuming fewer resources or recycling – then we should also feel compelled to examine our eating habits as well.

The Union of Concerned Scientists recently compiled a list of the most environmentally-damaging products, with meat coming in at number two. It came second only to automobiles. Here I discuss, specifically, the environmental impacts of the meat industry.

1. Land Use:
The use of agricultural land for production of meat is incredibly inefficient: one 10-acre farm can support 60 people by growing soybeans, 24 people if growing wheat, 10 people growing corn and only 2 producing cattle. In turn, the amount of grain that is fed to the industry’s animals could theoretically feed the starving global population, and yet the developing world's undernourished millions are instead in direct competition with the developed world's livestock; over 60% of the United States' grain is fed to “food-animals”, with the global percentage not far behind. Not only are we using our own land to produce livestock feed, but we're also exploiting land resources in Central and South America that could otherwise be used to grow food for the people living on it.
This isn't just an issue of efficient farmland use, however. Entire ecosystems - including the tropical rainforest - are perpetually devastated to fuel our addiction to meat. Millions of acres of wilderness are destroyed every day for increased meat production: every second, one football field-sized area of tropical rainforest is destroyed in order to produce the equivalent to 257 hamburgers.

2. Water Use:
Worldwide, agriculture uses up to 70% of fresh water resources, depleting non-renewable aquifers. In the United States, half of the water consumed is used in meat production, and as is the case with land use, the consumption is shockingly inefficient: roughly 265 gallons of water produces 1 lb of potatoes, 475 gallons per lb of wheat, 1,850 gallons per lb of chicken and a massive 5,000 gallons for 1 lb of beef.
For every pound of beef not eaten, you save up to 5,000 gallons of water! (Just for comparison, that’s the equivalent to the amount of water used in 40 baths, 300 toilet flushes, or the amount saved by using a low-flow shower head for a year.) So, if you eliminated one beef meal per month, you would reduce your annual water consumption by over 36,000 gallons.

3. Water Pollution:
Livestock raised for food produce more than 130 times the waste of the human population - US factory farms produce more than 1.5 billion tons of waste each year. This waste largely goes untreated and inadequately managed, seeping from farms into local ecosystems and groundwater, contaminating it. This is a serious health concern, and in California alone, 65% of the population is threatened by pollution in drinking water from dairy cow manure. Additionally, this waste moves along water systems, polluting areas along it until it reaches the ocean. The 7,000 square-mile Dead Zone of the Gulf of Mexico is caused by nitrogen-rich pollutants from farms – of which, livestock waste is a main contributor. We have strict laws for the disposal of human waste, but very few for that of animals.

4. Air Pollution:
Although those of livestock are less criticized than industrial and automobile emissions, it is undeniable that, due to their sheer numbers, the worldwide population of livestock is a significant hazard to the global climate. Not only do cattle produce almost one fifth of global methane emissions, but methane gas is 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide.

5. Fossil Fuel:
The amount of energy necessary to produce one pound of beef – from the transportation of feed, slaughtering procedures, transportation of meat to the packaging process - is astounding. Meat is a fuel-intensive industry, and is by no means the sustainable system that one might envision. For most grains in the United States, it takes just half a calorie of fossil fuel energy to produce one calorie of food. On the other hand, feedlot beef demands 33 calories of fossil fuel to produce the same one calorie of food. In terms of energy, crops are 50 times more efficient than cattle.

Again, these are merely the environmental reasons to reduce your consumption of meat, but this information alone is the strongest argument I've seen. These are the facts. If you find it possible to continue justifying your carnivorous diet with idealist thoughts of entitlement or smug preoccupations with “flavor”, then you are certainly at liberty to do so.
After all, you are American.
And we thrive on oil, SUV’s, and steak dinners.


sources:
1. Prof. V. Smil, "Rationalizing Animal Food Production," in Feeding the World: A Challenge for the 21st Century, MIT Press, London, 2000.
2. FAO, Review of agricultural water use per country
3. R. Goodland & D. Pimentel, 'Sustainability and Integrity in the Agriculture Sector,' Ecological Integrity: Integrating Environment, Conservation and Health, D. Pimentel, L. Westra, R. F. Noss (eds), Island Press, 2000.
4. Motavalli, Jim, "The Case Against Meat: Evidence Shows that Our Meat-Based Diet is Bad for the Environment, Aggravates Global Hunger, Brutalizes Animals and Compromises Our Health"
5. Boyan, Steve, PhD, "How Our Food Choices Can Help Save the Environment."