The following studies and facts are just the tip of the iceberg. Learn a quick lesson about the impact of animal agriculture by reading the examples below, which include information from the United Nations, the HSUS, and the American Dietary Association.
According to a 2006 study done by researchers at the University of Chicago, most Americans can reduce more greenhouse gas emissions by becoming a vegan than they can by switching to a hybrid electric car.
They found that eating a vegan diet prevents the equivalent of 1.5 tons of CO2 emissions every year, more than the 1 ton of CO2 emissions prevented by switching from a typical large sedan to a Toyota Prius [2].
(Source: NewScientist.com, “It’s Better to Green Your Diet Than Your Car,” 17 Dec. 2005.)
“[. . .] converting plant matter into animal protein by feeding it to farm animals wastes a great deal of protein and energy as “vegetables consumed as feed are used by the animals for their metabolic processes, as well as to build non-edible tissue like bones, cartilage, offal and feces.”
“Farm animal production is, in fact, a major driver of deforestation, turning wooded areas into grazing land and cropland for the production of feed.”
(Source: “An HSUS Report:The Impact of Animal Agriculture on Global Warming and Climate Change”)
According to a report published by the United Nations in 2006 entitled “Livestock’s Long Shadow”:
• The livestock sector emerges as one of the top two or three most significant contributors to the most serious environmental problems, at every scale from local to global. The findings of this report suggest that it should be a major policy focus when dealing with problems of land degradation, climate change and air pollution, water shortage and water pollution, and loss of biodiversity.
• [. . .] livestock production accounts for 70 percent of all agricultural land and 30 percent of the land surface of this planet.
• Expansion of livestock production is a key factor in deforestation [. . .] 70 percent of previously forested land in the Amazon is occupied by pastures, and feedcrops cover a large part of the remainder.
• The livestock sector is a major player [in climate change], responsible for 18 percent of greenhouse gas emissions measured in CO2 equivalent. This is a higher share than transport.
• [The livestock sector] is probably the largest sectoral source of water pollution, contributing to eutrophication, “dead” zones in coastal areas, degradation of coral reefs, human health problems, emergence of antibiotic resistance and many others. The major sources of pollution are from animal wastes, antibiotics and hormones, chemicals from tanneries, fertilizers and pesticides used for feedcrops, and sediments from eroded pastures.
• [In the U.S] livestock are responsible for an estimated 55 percent of erosion and sediment, 37 percent of pesticide use, 50 percent of antibiotic use, and a third of the loads of nitrogen and phosphorus into freshwater resources.
• Livestock also affect the replenishment of freshwater by compacting the soil, reducing infiltration, degrading the banks of watercourses, drying up the floodplains and lowering water tables. Livestock’s contribution to deforestation also increases runoff and reduces dry season flows.
• The livestock sector may well be the leading player in the reduction of biodiversity, since it is the major driver of deforestation, as well as one of the leading drivers of land degradation, pollution, climate change, overfishing, sedimentation of coastal areas, and facilitation of invasions by alien species.
A recent United Nations report (August 2010) entitled “Assessing the Environmental Impacts of Consumption and Production: Priority Products and Materials” states that:
• Globally, 70% of freshwater consumption and 38% of total land use are for agricultural production
• Animal products are important because more than half of the world’s crops are used to feed animals, not people.
• Impacts from agriculture are expected to increase substantially due to population growth, increasing consumption of animal products. Unlike fossil fuels, it is difficult to look for alternatives: people have to eat. A substantial reduction of impacts would only be possible with a substantial worldwide diet change, away from animal products.