Have you ever wondered about how what’s on your plate got there? It’s kind of shocking how big of an impact agriculture actually has on the environment. Like, for instance, how more than a third of all raw materials and fossil fuels consumed in the US are used for animal agriculture. That’s just the tip of the iceberg; the footprint of this industry is monumental.
Animal agriculture has become a social and environmental issue due to the broad impact our food choices have on the world. The sustainability of the world’s food system, in turn, is partly dependent on reducing animal agriculture’s footprint. The food we eat matters. It’s time to think critically about our food choices, so let’s dive in and discuss the inefficiency and problems of this industry.
Animal agriculture uses resources disproportionately.
Animal agriculture, as it stands, is an unsustainable industry. The common practices of this industry use an excessive number of resources. For example, water is a finite resource, yet animal agriculture uses 34-76 trillion gallons of water annually! Just growing feed crops for livestock uses 56% of the water in the US.
Industry efficiency is only proving to be more necessary too. In order to maximize yield to feed the continuously booming population while paying attention to climate issues, animal agriculture is not an effective allocation of land.
Livestock or livestock feed occupies one-third of the earth’s ice-free land, or 45% of the earth’s total land. Furthermore, animal agriculture uses about 70% of agricultural land. Poor feed quality in impoverished areas also means a cow there may eat as much as ten times more feed to produce a kilogram of protein when compared to a cow raised in richer areas.
About two to five acres of land are used per cow, with 1.5 acres on average producing 375 pounds of beef. On the other hand, that same land can produce 37,000 pounds of plant-based food instead! In conjunction, the protein content per acre of soybeans is 514,836 g per acre, while the protein content per acre of beef is 19,544.7 g per acre.
Growing plants, on any given area of land, can potentially provide fifteen times more protein than raising animals.
Overall, non-commercial poly-cultures are a better use of farmable land. They’re better for balancing diets and reducing risk because they don’t need agrochemicals for high yields. This keeps soil quality up and produces more food than animal agriculture.
Not only is animal agriculture not a good use of land, but land used for animal agriculture also eventually gets ruined in a process called desertification. This industry is the leading driver of the desertification of one-third of the planet. The constant grazing and manure run-off have caused the land used for these farms to become like a desert, dry and lacking biodiversity. Once the land is degraded and not as productive, the need to allocate more land for animal agriculture becomes constant.
So, what happens when you need more land for agriculture? You clear the landscape and create new space for farming. Consequently, the habitat loss that occurs due to animal agriculture is enormous. One acre of land is cleared every second. Furthermore, animal agriculture is responsible for up to 91% of the Amazon Rainforest’s destruction. This habitat loss then leads to enormous species loss.
Animal agriculture leads to high emissions and pollution.
Livestock in the US produce five hundred million tons of excrement every year, the majority of which is left in open-air waste lagoons from CAFOs, or concentrated animal feeding operations. The waste management of CAFOs leaves a lot to be desired. Bacteria break down the massive amounts of manure and ammonia gas is released. When ammonia gas combines with other pollutants in the air, nitric acid is formed. When nitric acid builds up in the atmosphere, it returns to the surface of the Earth as acid rain.
According to the FAO, animal agriculture accounts for 14.5% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Other organizations like the Worldwatch Institute, however, estimate this number could be as much as 51%.
Livestock accounts for an estimated 9% of global carbon dioxide emissions, 35-40% of global methane emissions, and 65% of nitrous oxide emissions. Methane gas is one of the largest contributors to climate change and can trap up to one hundred times more heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide over a five-year period.
Livestock operations have created more than five hundred nitrogen-flooded dead zones in oceans around the world due to improper manure management and the widespread use of pesticides, herbicides, and chemical fertilizers used for feed crops. These pesticides and fertilizers also interfere with the reproductive systems of animals that are unlucky enough to encounter them, which further affects biodiversity loss.
Animal agriculture also presents ethical issues.
As mentioned previously, animal agriculture presents some social issues. While industry is important, it should not cost us our morals or well-being. Yet, this is what we see when looking more closely at the animal agriculture industry. This industry is inherently unethical and gives rise to human and animal welfare issues.
First, let’s talk about how human welfare is affected.
Quality of life is diminished in the surrounding areas of these farms and this disproportionately affects vulnerable communities. The affected communities typically fall below the poverty level and as such don’t have the option to relocate or fight for their rights to clean air and water. Residents and farm workers tend to suffer from respiratory irritation, bronchitis, lung inflammation, dust-toxic syndrome, asthma, and possibly cardiac arrest.
Ammonia emissions alone can cause dizziness, eye irritation, respiratory illness, and nausea. The release of hydrogen sulfide, whose source is also manure, can cause sore throats, seizures, comas, and even death. These dangerous substances have the potential to travel long distances and stay present for fair amounts of time leading to these ramifications even at low levels. Furthermore, the CDC has reported increased sensitization to smell and mental health deterioration can occur in people who live near these factory farms.
Animal agriculture promotes food insecurity.
The animal agriculture industry is costly. Due to this industry, there is an estimated $414 billion dollars in externalized costs, i.e., the cost of production that someone else pays for. For example, about 82% of starving children live in countries where food is fed to animals that are then eaten by Western countries. The global calorie availability could be increased by as much as 70% by shifting crops away from animal feed to human consumption.
When dealing with an inefficient and problematic food system, the ability to ensure food security becomes a problem. The UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food advocates for structural reforms and a shift to agroecology. Agroecological practices, or farming like a diversified ecosystem, contribute to higher resistance to extreme climate events.
This means that it supports long-term farm sustainability which is crucial when about 345 million people are projected to be food insecure. Agroecological methods that emphasize rich crop diversity have been shown to conserve soil and water quality and quantity too.
Replacing animal agriculture with more practical and sustainable solutions can feed a greater amount of people while also improving quality of life. The International Assessment on Agriculture, Science, and Knowledge for Development concluded that agroecology and locally-based food economies instead of a global market were the best strategies for combating poverty and hunger.
Now let’s move on and discuss how animal welfare is affected.
CAFOs alone are ridiculous operations where animal welfare is thrown out the window. In order to keep up with the rising demands for animal protein, the physical and emotional needs of the animals can’t possibly be met. Animals are locked into cages with minimal room to breathe, let alone move and behave normally.
In industrialized poultry farms, birds get their beaks mutilated in order to stop them from pecking at each other in these too-tight quarters. Furthermore, dairy cows spend their whole lives confined and surrounded by concrete. The living conditions for these animals are horrid and lead to mass disease, skin lesions, abnormal behaviors, and more.
Government agencies don’t always stay on the right side of things either. The USDA predator killings of wild animals to protect livestock is a prime example of this. Native predator species and native “competition” species are hunted because of perceived threats to livestock profits. This hurts native populations tremendously and leads to species decline and loss of biodiversity.
What can be done?
From the deforestation needed to grow feed and graze animals, the transportation needed to feed the animals and distribute products, and the emissions and waste created through raising the animals these problems cannot be ignored. Agroecological approaches and structural reforms are the best methods to ensure that everyone has the means for a sustainable livelihood.
Animal agriculture simply cannot be a part of the solution to food insecurity or climate issues as it stands. A cultural shift starting with the West is desperately needed in order to lessen this industry’s impact. Western levels of meat consumption cannot be sustainably adopted by the rest of the world, even if livestock management becomes more efficient globally. Demand management must, therefore, be a central part of the solution. We must press leaders to address the impact of this industry.
Regardless of the specific industry, accountability is needed above all.
On the community level, we can advocate for local small-scale gardens or food operations to help ensure access to healthful food while also being a more productive, manageable, and environmentally friendly use of land.
On an individual level, eating less meat is the best way to be part of the solution. If we all began to favor lower-impact foods, such as local, plant-based options, we could effectively lower this industry’s footprint.
We must shift our focus toward what would be best for societal needs for a more secure and conscious future. Address your food’s impact and pave the way for a cleaner and more sustainable future.