Rivera 1

Nick Rivera

English 103 MW 11:45

Ms. Ruiz

3 October 2016

Animal Agriculture

Due to the increasing demand for animal-based products, the need for more expedient

and industrialized methods of producing meat has drastically increased. As a result, many farms

have expanded to accommodate the growing market of animal agriculture. Animal agriculture, in

its basic sense, is the raising of farm animals for the singular purpose of producing food. The

fundamental premise of animal agriculture seems promising to the agricultural sphere in both its

own ability to maximize profits and its ability to supply the public with an abundance of meat

products. However, this had been proven to be one of the most destructive and inefficient uses of

natural resources, making its economic growth unsustainable when taking into account the

monetary and environmental costs of resource exhaustion. Animal agriculture is not only harmful

in its own regard, but it does not lend to the most beneficially efficient diet. Ultimately, animal

agriculture should be discontinued because it is unsustainable within an already depleted

environment.

While not the only causing factor of global warming, animal agriculture produces an

overwhelming negative and environmentally dangerous impact on air quality. This is caused by

the extreme polluting potential of hazardous farming practices, such as burning forests, crop

production, irresponsible waste management, chemical fertilizers, and their invisibility to the

public. In the global context, animal agriculture contributes anywhere from 18 to 51% of global

anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (Henning 11). Granted the dramatic push
 Rivera 2

towards cutting down on transportation use-- which only accounts for 13% of greenhouse gas

emissions annually-- there is an absence of conversation surrounding emissions from animal

agriculture (Cowspiracy). Transportation talk mainly gravitates around the increase in carbon

dioxide emissions, and most public policies reflect this. Though, there is a neglect in discussion

regarding animal agricultures influence in global warming, partly, because it makes up only a

small portion of carbon dioxide emissions. Still, it is directly responsible for 9% of the worlds

total from burning forests and producing fertilizers (Henning 73). Even if the world stopped

using fossil fuels immediately, emissions from animal production would still surpass earths

carbon dioxide limit by 2030 (Cowspiracy). So, the notion that cutting down on fossil fuels

provides a solution to this issue is far from the truth.

While exhaust from cars and carbon dioxide are important contributors to climate change,

the more profound threats to the environment are the methane and nitrous oxide greenhouse

gases from animal waste and chemical fertilizers. The reality is that methane and nitrous oxide

have a greater global warming potential than carbon dioxide by factors of 23 and 296,

respectively (Koneswaran and Nierenberg 578). As a primary factor in the animal agriculture

industry, cows are responsible for emitting anywhere from 35-40% of methane emissions

originating from their large manure deposits (Koneswaran and Nierenberg580). Even though

methane is more destructive, it only stays in the atmosphere for less than 20 years, so restricting

these emissions could show benefits in the near future. The environmental impact of nitrous

oxide is less forgiving. The emissions from chemical fertilizers and animal production are

responsible for 65% of all human-related emissions of nitrous oxide (Koneswaran and

Nierenberg 580). Nitrous oxide is notably more detrimental for the atmosphere because, not only

is it 296 times more destructive than carbon dioxide, it also stays in the atmosphere for around
 Rivera 3

150 years (Cowspiracy). When taking into account all three of these major GHGs, it seems

ridiculous that animal productions impacts are almost nonexistent in the global warming

discussion. Animal agricultures effects prove to be a consequential factor in global warming.

Unless animal agriculture is stopped, emissions will continue to increase by 80% by 2050

(Cowspiracy).

Not only does it produce harmful greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to the

growing issue of global warming, animal agriculture is also one of the largest consumers and

polluters of water. Regardless of the emerging strive for water conservation in individual use, the

overwhelming majority of water usage in the US is utilized by the animal agriculture industry.

While roughly 10% of the worlds fresh water is consumed within private households, nearly 66-

70% is consumed to maintain livestock feed crops and farm conservation (Henning 8). Yet, there

is no common criticism or government action to reduce the water usage for animal agriculture in

the same regard as there is for individuals. Due to the rising shortage of water, this absurd over

usage proves to be an inefficient use of an essential and quickly diminishing resource.

Cowspiracy illustrates this by offering an example that one pound of beef requires 2,500 gallons

of water, equating to roughly 660 gallons for an average sized hamburger. Since this excessive

water usage comparatively translates into such an minute amount of consumable product, this

reveals a significantly wasteful use of valuable resources that could be used more practically

elsewhere. To make matters worse, even water sources that are not currently being abused by

agriculture are effected. It is estimated that an upwards of 70% of water pollution is from animal

agriculture related practices (Horrigan 447). Usually, this mass pollution arises from sloppy

farming tactics and carelessness. Everything from animal waste, chemical fertilizers, and

pesticides bring potential risk to sensitive bodies of water by seeping into ground water and
 Rivera 4

runoff that allows chemicals, like nitrogen and phosphorus, to flow into rivers (Henning 9).

Pollution at this growing rate both damages the organisms in those habitats and is further

reducing the amount of freshwater that isnt already being abused by animal production. Further,

Henning notes that the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN predicts that, by the year

2025 64% of the worlds population may live in water-stressed basins (8). Animal

agriculture devours and pollutes the worlds water excessively, while producing a proportionally

small amount of meat that cannot effectively sustain both the environment and the meat-based

diet of society.

A large amount of the worlds land is either currently being used for agriculture or has

already been desertified by it. Messy industrial farming practices such as overgrazing, overusing

water, deforestation, and others kill the land, making it unsuitable for further farming (Horrigan

447). The continuation of these practices is eroding away the available amount of sustainable

farming land at alarming rates. When 56 billion animals are being raised for food worldwide and

2-5 acres of land is used for each cow, it becomes no surprise that one third of earths land is

already desertified (Koneswaran and Nierenberg 579). The planet simply does not have enough

land to sustain such a high demand for beef products that requires nearly 8 animals for every

human. And many, once thriving, ecosystems are being demolished in an attempt to quarter these

animals. In particular, cattle ranching continues to be the primary cause of deforestation in the

Amazon, making up 91% of its destruction with 1-2 more acres of rainforest cleared every

second (Cowspiracy). Over 70% of the Amazon rainforest has now been converted into pasture

land and fields for animal food crops (Henning 72). In this process, other animals, plants, and

insects are either displaced or go extinct. Cowspiracy adds that up to 137 plant, animal and

insect species are lost every day due to rainforest destruction. With such destructive factors, like
 Rivera 5

overgrazing, deforestation, and desertification, there may not be any fertile land or exotic species

left in the near future.

Due to the limited availability of natural resources that are needed for the operations of

the animal agriculture industry and the excessive usage of such resources, it seems realistic to

assume that it eventually must end. Supporters of animal agriculture claim that the industry is too

crucial for our economy, so it must be kept. Currently, animal agriculture does play an important

role in the economy. On the national level, animal agriculture has an output of about 289 million

dollars and creates over 50 million jobs worldwide, including the 220,000 animal agriculture

related jobs within the state of Texas alone (National Animal Agriculture). Even though this

industry produces economic prosperity for the West now, as natural resources run out, the

benefits that it gives to the economy will disappear causing a vacuum within the economic

makeup of the US. In addition to the eventual automation of some factory jobs, including those

within animal agriculture industries, there will also be a proportional decrease in the amount of

available natural resources and the amount of jobs provided. While ending animal agriculture

now would not avoid any economic consequences, the purposeful and preventative ending would

allow citizens and policymakers significant time to plan for a future that transitions away from

the dependency on animal agriculture and protect natural resources that remain. The animal

agriculture industry will inevitably end, but whether it happens in advance or after earth has lost

its resources is horrifyingly unclear.

Considering its continuous and extortionate growth, animal agriculture has become the

most pronounced threat to the environment. Animal agriculture alone directly accounts for a

large portion of the harmful effects on air quality, land usage, and water resources. After

considering this, it becomes clear that the trivial benefits of animal production are vastly
 Rivera 6

outweighed by the catastrophic effects it produces, such as drought, melting ice caps,

deforestation, species extinction, pollution, and many more. With all the devastating effects

caused by animal agriculture, there is surprising little to no government action and virtually no

public awareness. The growing environmental impact of the animal agricultures excessive and

profligate use of meager resources proves to be an unsustainable aspect of society that must be

discontinued. Society needs to help end the exploitation of our environment by restraining from

consuming animal-based products.

 Rivera 7

Works Cited

Cowspiracy. Animals United Movement, 2014, www.cowspiracy.com/facts/. Accessed 13 Oct.

2016.

Henning, Brian. "Standing in Livestock's "Long Shadow'': The Ethics of Eating Meat on A Small

Planet." Ethics & The Environment, vol. 16, no. 2, Fall 2011, pp. 63-93. Academic Search

Premier, doi:10.2979/ethicsenviro.16.2.63. Accessed 13 Oct. 2016.

Horrigan, Leo, Robert S. Lawrence, and Polly Walker. "How Sustainable Agriculture Can

Address the Environment and Human Health Harms of Industrial Agriculture."

Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 110, no. 5, May 2002, pp. 445. GreenFILE.

Accessed 13 Oct. 2016.

Koneswaran, Gowri, and Danielle Nierenberg. "Global Farm Animal

Production and Global Warming: Impacting and Mitigating Climate Change."

Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 116, no. 5, May 2008, pp. 578-582. GreenFILE.

Accessed 13 Oct. 2016.