by Emily Cathcart

Created on: November 24, 2007

Vegetarians give a variety of reasons for choosing a meatless diet, and environmental concerns are often included. So how exactly does your steak dinner negatively impact the Earth? If you are a typical citizen of the U.S, you consume more meat than a person of any other country. So maybe a more apt question is how does the animal-centered diet of your culture negatively impact the world?

The heart of the issue is that meat production is not environmentally sustainable. Compared to growing crops to feed people, raising animals for meat creates more pollution and uses more of the Earth's resources, such as fossil fuels, water and land.

It takes much more water to produce the same amount of food in a beef operation as opposed to growing grains or vegetables for food. According to the USDA one half of the U.S. water supply is used for crops for animal feed. In fact, 80% of agricultural land in the U.S. is devoted to the production of animal feed. This land is put into huge areas of monoculture by large corporate producers, whose farming practices are non-sustainable and damaging to ecosystems.

In industrialized countries, more fossil fuel is burned to produce meat than to produce food in the form of grains, vegetables, legumes, seeds or fruits. The comparison of the energy input to the protein output reveals the inefficiency of meat production (as well as other animal products such as milk and eggs).

The use of land with regard to meat production is fairly shocking. 260 million acres of U.S. forest have been cleared to create cropland to grow grain for farm animals. The same is true for rainforests in Brazil and old growth pine forests in China. Where cattle are allowed to overgraze there are serious effects such as soil erosion and the extinction of indigenous plant and animal species.

The aspect of meat production that is so distressing is the consideration, globally, of world hunger. Animals are inefficient converters of food resources, consuming far more food than they produce. According to Cornell University scientists, the U.S. could feed 800 million people with the grain that is grown to feed livestock.

So, if you skip the meat part of your meal will the hungry be fed? Possibly not, but maybe it is more of a philosophical decision. While malnutrition is a worldwide crisis, the grossly inefficient and non-sustainable use of Earth's resources to produce meat is an indulgence that some of us choose to bypass. According to the Worldwatch Institute lowering meat consumption worldwide will allow for a more efficient use of declining land and water resources. With a burgeoning human population and serious shortages of food and drinkable water, our use of resources needs to be thoughtful. Reducing your personal intake of meat may be analogous to picking up a gum wrapper off the beach. Others may continue to litter, but you are demonstrating a conviction to create a healthier planet and possibly setting an example.

Learn more about this author, Emily Cathcart.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.