Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Effects of agriculture
How eating meat affects environment essay thesis
Environmental impact of meat essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Effects of agriculture
The ideology of fresher and more local food has been spreading like wildfire acrossing many countries, including the United States. This movement brings many beneficial factors to the table. The locavore movement supports small farms and it allows customer to be in touch with where their food comes from; therefore, the movement provides a better and healthier local economy for the community. This locavore movement supports small farms and farm land. By buying from small farms versus industrialized farms, customers are able to reduce their carbon footprint. McWilliams applies this in his article when he explains, “But New Zealand is raised on pastures with a small carbon footprint, whereas most English lamb is produced...with a big carbon
James E. Mcwilliams stated his aversion to the locavore movement in his essay “The Locavore Myth: Why Buying from Nearby Farmers Won’t Save the Planet”. The locavore movement is the concept of buying produce, meat, and other farm-grown food locally as opposed to having your vegetables or fruits shipped from across the world. This notion believes going local reduces harm to the environment by decreasing the miles food needs to travel before landing on your plate. From the title of his essay itself, the claim would seem obvious. The locavore movement does not essentially help save the environment through lessened food mileage. Don’t be easily swayed, in short. Mcwilliams presented several grounds and data for his justification on this issue.
Lundberg describes how the demand for animal protein was incredibly higher than the production. She quoted Marlow’s article stating, “A nonvegetarian diet requires 2.9 times more water, 2.5 times more energy, 13 times more fertilizer, and 1.4 times more pesticide than does a vegetarian diet and the greatest difference comes from beef consumption” (Lundberg 483). She then questions: "Do we really want to wait until it’s too late to change our way of eating?” (Lundberg 485). These two points will make readers subconsciously pause to answer this question themselves, put themselves in the situation imagining the products used and having an immediate reaction to it.
Moreover, this system of mass farming leads to single crop farms, which are ecologically unsafe, and the unnatural treatment of animals (Kingsolver 14). These facts are presented to force the reader to consider their own actions when purchasing their own food because of the huge economic impact that their purchases can have. Kingsolver demonstrates this impact by stating that “every U.S. citizen ate just one meal a week (any meal) composed of locally and organically raised meats and produce, we
Reason 2: the locavore movement is saving the world with its conservation of the environment
Former editor of Us News and World Report and recipient of Guggenheim Award,Stephen Budiansky in his article, “Math Lessons For Locavores”,published in August 19,2012 addresses the topic of locally grown food and argues it as a more sustainable choice in terms of freshness and seasons.I agree with Budiansky for growing food locally,however; with three other reasons: we can reduce food waste,(which will benefit the environment), and obesity(which will help an individual mentally and physically), and improve our economy. The purpose is to illustrate why locally grown foods would be a finer option for an American lifestyle. Budiansky adopts an informative,persuasive,and insightful tone for his audience,readers
Environmental advocate and cofounder of Eatingliberally.org, Kerry Trueman, in her response to Stephen Budiansky’s Math Lessons for Locavores, titled, The Myth of the Rabid Locavore, originally published in the Huffington Post, addresses the topic of different ways of purchasing food and its impact on the world. In her response, she argues that Budiansky portrayal of the Local Food Movement is very inaccurate and that individuals should be more environmentally conscious. Trueman supports her claim first by using strong diction towards different aspects of Budinsky essay, second by emphasizes the extent to which his reasoning falls flat, and lastly by explaining her own point with the use of proper timing. More specifically, she criticizes many
Our current system of corporate-dominated, industrial-style farming might not resemble the old-fashioned farms of yore, but the modern method of raising food has been a surprisingly long time in the making. That's one of the astonishing revelations found in Christopher D. Cook's "Diet for a Dead Planet: Big Business and the Coming Food Crisis" (2004, 2006, The New Press), which explores in great detail the often unappealing, yet largely unseen, underbelly of today's food production and processing machine. While some of the material will be familiar to those who've read Michael Pollan's "The Omnivore's Dilemma" or Eric Schlosser's "Fast-Food Nation," Cook's work provides many new insights for anyone who's concerned about how and what we eat,
A key issue of the locavore movement is the economic effect it has on a community. A positive result of the movement is the growth of local farms. As Pallavi Gogoi said in his business magazine article, “The local food movement has already accomplished something… a revival of small farms” (Source E).
More and more farm-to-table restaurants, farmer’s markets, and food co-ops are cropping up to meet the demand among consumers for healthy, local foods, as more chefs and consumers recognize the poorer taste and nutritional integrity of ingredients shipped in from far away. Fruits and vegetables that have to be shipped long distances are often picked before they have a chance to fully ripen and absorb nutrients from their surroundings. Because local food doesn’t have to travel long distances, it is grown in order to taste better and be healthier rather than to be resilient to long travel. The farm-to-table movement also helps local economies by supporting small farmers, which is a dying
A major issue that is occurring in America is a phenomena known as “food deserts”, most are located in urban areas and it's difficult to buy affordable or good-quality fresh food. Whereas in the past, food deserts were thought to be solved with just placing a grocery store in the area, but with times it has become an issue that people are not picking the best nutritional option. This issue is not only making grocery store in food deserts are practically useless and not really eliminating the issue of food deserts because even when they are given a better nutritional option, and people are not taking it. In my perspective, it takes more than a grocery store to eliminate ‘food deserts’. It's more about demonstrating the good of picking the nutritional option and how it can help them and their families. For example, “Those who live in these areas are often subject to poor diets as a result and are at a greater risk of becoming obese or developing chronic diseases.”(Corapi, 2014).
However, Hare’s pro demi-vegetarian argument provides an unequivocal view on the discussion of economic, ecological, and moral topics. While the look into market trends of meat is lacking Hare discusses a reality of the meat industry and its food competitors, that being the cost behind animal rearing and husbandry. While the high costs incurred does not entail permissibility the surrounding circumstances do. If fodder is grown on terrain only suitable for a pasture, then as a result husbandry and animal domestication (and later slaughter) is permissible because the economic consequences of harvesting crops would greatly outweigh the benefits and as such the community improves more from the meat/animal byproduct industry. This economical and ecological argument is one of several that Hare provides in his article Why I Am Only A Demi-Vegetarian, in addition to the market term being coined and reasoning behind
A locavore is a person that follows a diet that consists of locally grown or produced food. What once was local is now going worldwide, because not only does the fruit taste fresher but it also tastes better. Locally grown food has also been proven to be better than eating organic food, especially when it comes to air quality and pollution. In 2005
And, because food now comes at a low cost, it has become cheaper in quality and therefore potentially dangerous to the consumer’s health. These problems surrounding the ethics and the procedures of the instantaneous food system are left unchanged due to the obliviousness of the consumers and the dollar signs in the eyes of the government and big business. The problem begins with the mistreatment and exploitation of farmers. Farmers are essentially the backbone of the entire food system. Large-scale family farms account for 10% of all farms, but 75% of overall food production (CSS statistics).
A United Nations report states that land used for animal agriculture, both for grazing and production of crops fed to livestock, takes up an astounding 30% of land on Earth. ("Meat Production Wastes Natural Resources") To meet the industry’s demands, over 260 million acres of forest in the U.S. have been cleared to grow grain fed to farm animals. ("Meat Production Wastes Natural Resources") With that in mind, the meat industry also dumps disease-causing pathogens through animal waste that pollutes water and forces the need for waste lagoons to be constructed, which are susceptible to leaking and flooding. ("Facts about Pollution from Livestock Farms”) Scientists say that about 14% of the world’s greenhouse gases are released by said agriculture industries, which is a growing concern for climate change and global warming. (Silverman) The meat industry uses one-third of all the fossil fuels consumed in the United States. (Moore) There is no question that farming animals has a negative effect on the environment and steps should be taken to mitigate air and water pollution risks and future deforestation. If animal agriculture was phased out, land used for animal grazing could be returned to forest land and some of it converted into fields for cultivating crops for humans. A global shift toward veganism, resulting in the elimination of the meat and animal agriculture industries, would protect the environment from various detrimental effects.
“Currently 80% of the world’s agricultural land is used directly or indirectly for animal production. In the US over half the total land mass is used for the production of meat and dairy products” (Clarke).