After screening the documentary Eating Our Way to Extinction at my parish, one of the attendees acknowledged his unawareness about the devastating environmental impact of meat. One might imagine that someone attending this documentary might already have been aware of the significant contribution of meat production to the environmental crisis. The fact that even meat-eaters who are sympathetic to environmental issues do not know the impact of their own diets underscores the severity of the problem of ignorance in this pressing issue. Ignorance of our contribution is a primary cause of our apathy towards the ecological crisis.
The best way to address what Pope Francis calls the “globalization of indifference” is to raise awareness about the problem. When people ask me why I am vegan, I reply “if you knew what I knew, you would be vegan as well.” Treating the problems associated with meat production as “out of sight, out of mind” is neither a sustainable nor a Christian way of proceeding in the face of grave injustice. Even those aware of the large carbon footprint of meat may not appreciate its magnitude or its impacts on water quality and land use. To counter this globalization of indifference, this article will shine light on the ignored ecological cost of animal-based food.
Visitors to Capitol Reef National Park in Utah, famous for its sandstone rock formations, cannot swim in the river because of water contamination by farm animals upstream of the park. Farm animals are packed together in much higher concentrations than wild animals, leading to water contamination from insufficient dilution. Additionally, runoff of fertilizers used to grow feed for animals results in nitrate contamination which stimulates toxic algae bloom and dead zones in water bodies such as lakes, rivers, and coastal seas.
Besides contamination, the other major issue of animal agriculture is water consumption from increasingly depleted rivers and aquifers. A report in the New York Times noted that more than half of the water from the Colorado River, a once mighty river that now no longer reaches the ocean, is used to feed animals. The crops grown for direct human consumption use less than a quarter of the water that livestock feed uses. For instance, it takes 38 gallons of water to produce one quarter-pound beef patty. In comparison, producing the same amount of protein through tofu needs about five gallons of water. Even much-maligned almond milk uses less water than dairy milk.
Furthermore, production of animal-based foods requires large tracts of land. Because we cannot create more land, we must convert forests and grasslands to farms. Over 90% of the deforestation in the Amazon Rainforest is driven by the need to grow feed for farm animals. Some sources suggest that the “carbon dioxide released by converting wild landscapes into farms and pastures is already the most damaging source of agricultural (carbon) emissions, worse than methane from cow burps.”
Corn and soy farms currently occupy land that could be returned to their native forests and grassland ecosystems. For instance, Denmark plans to plant 1 billion trees to convert 10% of farmland into forest and natural habitats over the next two decades. Plant-based diets need a fraction of the land to provide the same amount of calories and protein for human consumption. If the world adopted a plant-based diet, we would slash global agricultural land use from 4 to 1 billion hectares. This is because most of our agricultural land is used to grow crops or grazing for animals. Imagine returning 3 billion hectares back to forests and grassland that will serve as giant carbon-soaking lungs for our planet. That’s four times the size of the contiguous US!
Lest we think that humane free-range animal-farming might be the silver bullet, let’s remember that earth’s land area is limited. We can do some math to quantify our land capacity for free-range animals. Excluding Alaska, the US has about 3 million square miles of land. Leaving out 33% (5% for urban use and 27% for current forest cover), we are left with 2 million square miles of land. Every year, Americans consume 8 billion chickens, 120 million pigs, 35 million cows, and 270 million turkeys. If we imagined using all that land to raise animals and for nothing else, every square mile of land would need to provide free-range forage for 4000 chickens, 60 pigs, 18 cows, and 135 turkeys, excluding dairy cows and egg-laying chickens. Even if we used every available square mile of America, we would not be able to sustain our current rate of meat consumption without factory farming.
Controversially, free-range farms on a large scale may be worse for the environment than factory farms. Michael Grunwald wrote in the New York Times: “Old MacDonald-style farms where soil is nurtured with love and animals have names rather than numbers may sound environmentally friendly. But their artisanal grains and grass-fed beef are worse for nature than chemical-drenched corn and feedlot-fattened beef because they require much more land for each calorie they produce.” Grunwald uses this argument to justify industrial agriculture because he believes that people will not reduce meat consumption.
Such a cynical view of humanity which sees us as incapable of great change is not worthy of Christians. Discipleship of Christ is about turning away from our sinful ways, and walking the way of love, kindness and compassion even when it is not the most convenient thing to do. If we cannot have free-range meat, we ought to abstain rather than settle for the cruel factory farmed meat.
The carbon footprint of meat is relatively well known among the general population. However, the magnitude of that footprint ought to give us pause. In a previous essay, I had noted that 25% of our total carbon footprint comes from the meat and dairy in our diet. If Americans shifted to a plant-based diet, we would slash our nation’s carbon emissions by a quarter, thereby gaining precious time to decarbonize the electric grid and improve the efficiency of our transportation system.
All that hand-wringing and mournful sighing regarding climate change at the COP summits and environmental advocacy gatherings are disconnected from reality when we ignore the cow in the room: the consumption of animal-based foods. Given the outsized impact of animal agriculture on climate change, one may not call oneself a climate activist while continuing to consume animal-based foods unabated.
Knowledge of the environmental impacts of animal-based diets ought to invoke in us a desire for change. However, change for the good is not inevitable when the status quo has a vice-like grip on our habits. Martin Luther King Jr. once wrote, “We must come to see that human progress never rolls in on wheels of inevitability. It comes through the tireless efforts and persistent work of people willing to be coworkers with God, and without this hard work time itself becomes an ally of the forces of social stagnation.” Things will not improve if we do not work at improving them.
In the same essay, King noted that “if today’s church does not recapture the sacrificial spirit of the early church, it will lose its authenticity, forfeit the loyalty of millions, and be dismissed as an irrelevant social club with no meaning for the twentieth century.” The Christian life is about sacrificing the comfort of the status quo for the sake of discipleship of Christ which includes care for God’s creation.
Perhaps, if you don’t know how to cook plant-based food, you could begin by eating plant-based meals at restaurants. You could learn one plant-based recipe a month that you could use twice a month. In a year, you will have twelve plant-based recipes that will serve you 24 days a month.
It is never too late to learn to cook. Personally, I took cooking seriously only after I turned vegan in my early thirties because I had to sustain myself in meat-and-dairy-heavy Jesuit communities. I had to live the reality of a vegan lifestyle if I were to continue advocating for it. Happily, I found that vegan food is easy to cook, nutritious, delicious and affordable.
Fortunately, meat, dairy, and eggs do not have to be the default main dishes. It was made so by the marketing genius of big-ag and the generous subsidies they wrangled from the government. Happily, things are beginning to change. Recently, an advisory committee to the Agriculture Department proposed changes to U.S. dietary guidelines by encouraging people to eat more beans and lentils and less red meat.
Ida B. Wells, an early leader in the civil rights movement, sagely noted that “the way to right wrongs is to turn the light of truth upon them.” Now we know the wrongs we inflict on the environment through our continued consumption of animal-based foods. Now that we know, let us commit to abstaining from participation in unnecessary and wanton ecological destruction through consumption of animal-based food. To show our care for God’s creation, a plant-based diet can provide an easy, healthy, compassionate and cost-efficient way forward.
—
Photo courtesy of Pixabay
