Dear “Earth Talk: What is the modern
meat industry’s impact on the environment?
— Jeremy Smith, Bellefonte, Pa.
In a recent E/The
Environmental Magazine cover
story, author Jim Motavalli wrote: “Just about every aspect
of meat production — from grazing-related loss of cropland
and open space to the inefficiencies of feeding vast quantities of
water and grain to cattle in a hungry world to pollution from
‘factory farms’ — is an environmental disaster
with wide and sometimes catastrophic consequences.”
Indeed, according to the Sierra Club, the
production of one pound of grain-fed beef requires about 16 pounds
of wheat and — as staggering as it sounds — 2,500
gallons of water. Furthermore, millions of acres of forest have
been cleared worldwide to make room for the large areas of land
needed for cattle grazing. In the U.S., more than 260 million acres
of forest have been cleared to grow crops to feed animals raised
for meat, and an acre of trees disappears every eight seconds.
Tropical rainforests are also being cut to
create grazing land for cattle. Fifty-five square feet of
rainforest may be destroyed to produce just one quarter-pound
burger. Because trees absorb carbon dioxide, the leading
“greenhouse gas,” this significant loss of forest
contributes to global warming as well.
Soil erosion is also mostly caused by the meat
industry, which, according to the Worldwatch Institute, is directly
responsible for 85 percent of all soil erosion in the United States
because so much grain is needed to feed the animals. Livestock is
fed more than 80 percent of the corn and 95 percent of the oats
grown by American farmers. The world’s cattle alone consume a
quantity of food equal to the caloric needs of 8.7 billion people
— more than the entire human population of Earth.
A recent report prepared for the U.S. Senate
Agricultural Committee concluded that animal waste is the largest
contributor to pollution in 60 percent of the rivers and streams
classified as “impaired” by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. The report states that food animals produce waste at
a rate of roughly 68,000 pounds per second. Major waste pollutants that
make their way into our waterways include nutrients such as nitrogen
and phosphorus that can cause massive fish kills, harmful bacteria and
viruses, and toxic heavy metals, which are present in some commercial
livestock feed.
Critics also point to the fact that meat-based
diets exacerbate world hunger. Harvard nutritionist Jean Mayer
estimates that a 10 percent reduction in U.S. meat consumption
would free up enough grain to feed 60 million people. Some 40
percent of the world’s grain harvest is fed to livestock, and
nearly a billion people go hungry each day.
Although environmental groups recognize the
benefits of vegetarianism as an alternative, few recommend it for
everyone. Meat-loving environmentalists can look for small farms
that feed livestock natural, organic diets, treat animals more
humanely, and practice more sustainable land use.
For more information:
Jim Motavalli, “The Case Against Meat,” E/The Environmental Magazine, January-February
2002, www.emagazine.com/view/?142; Sierra Club, 415-977-5500,
www.sierraclub.org/factoryfarms/; Worldwatch Institute,
202-452-1999, www.worldwatch.org.
Send questions to “Earth Talk” in
care of E/The Environmental Magazine P.O. Box 5098, Westport, CT 06881; or e-mail earthtalk@emagazine.com.
This article appears in Jan 27 – Feb 2, 2005.
