“Agriculture isn’t destroying the planet — agriculture is feeding it.”
What’s worse than an anti-ag activist? An un-informed anti-ag activist. This week, we’re going to focus on a heavily discussed topic: Greenhouse Gas Emissions.
For the past year or so in the anti-ag and vegan Facebook groups I’m a member of, it seems the “animal-ag-is-bad train” has derailed from the historically consistent, “we shouldn’t kill another living thing,” argument to the “cows give off greenhouse gases and animal agriculture is bad for the environment,” side of the tracks.
Before we go any further, I need to share a statistic the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released:
“Since 1990, gross U.S. greenhouse gas emissions have increased by 1.3 percent. From year to year, emissions can rise and fall due to changes in the economy, the price of fuel, and other factors. In 2017, U.S. greenhouse gas emissions decreased compared to 2016 levels. The decrease in CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion was a result of multiple factors, including a continued shift from coal to natural gas, increased use of renewables in the electric power sector, and milder weather that contributed to less overall electricity use.”
It’s important to understand what greenhouse gases are. If you’re like me, you may remember talking about greenhouse gases in elementary school and seeing a cartoon-ish diagram in your science book. Here’s what I remember about greenhouses gases from elementary school science class: They’re bad.
Essentially, greenhouse gases trap heat in the atmosphere which ultimately contributes to climate change — don’t try to rebuttal this column and say climate change is “fake news.” It’s not fake news, it’s an actual issue and I’m about to explain to you how real it is as well as what is causing it. If you don’t believe me, visit climate.nasa.gov to read about climate change from literal rocket scientists.
According to the EPA, the main greenhouse gases includes carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide and fluorinated gases with carbon dioxide contributing to 82 percent of greenhouse gas emissions. Carbon dioxide enters the atmosphere by the burning of fossil fuels such as oil, natural gas and coal. Other causes of carbon dioxide include solid waste (trash/garbage), biological materials (trees) and certain chemical reactions (such as the manufacture of cement).
Methane emissions make up 10 percent of greenhouse gas emissions and are a result of the production and transport of fossil fuels, agricultural practices and the decay of organic waste.
Nitrous oxide is responsible for six percent of greenhouse gas emissions and is emitted from industrial and agricultural activities, the combustion of fossil fuels and solid waste and treatment of wastewater.
And finally, around three percent of greenhouse gas emissions come from fluorinated gases: hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, sulfur hexafluoride and nitrogen trifluoride. These are powerful greenhouse gases and are emitted from industrial processes. Fluorinated gases are usually emitted in small quantities — something we should be thankful for, because they’re incredibly potent and referred to as “High Global Warming Potential,” gases.
Now that we know the scientific side of greenhouse gas emissions, let’s focus on what exactly causes these gases to be released into the atmosphere. All facts and figures listed below can be traced back to the EPA’s 2017 report on greenhouse gas emissions.
Nearly one-third (28.9 percent) of greenhouse gas emissions can be chalked-up to transportation. At my elementary school, we honored Earth Day each year. We would spend the day making recycled treasures out of things we dug out of the trash and were told things like, “Make sure to turn the sink off when you brush your teeth to save water!”
Another thing we read about in our science books and were told to do (although it didn’t exactly pertain to someone living in a small community where public transportation is not offered) was to take public buses or subways. I am 22 years old now, this means at least 10 years ago children who lived in the middle-of-nowhere, Texas and had no control over their specific means of transportation were told to carpool and use public transportation. If I can remember being told about this, I know people who live in heavily populated areas with easily accessible means of public transportation were told this as well.
A close second to transportation, electricity production is responsible for 27.5 percent of greenhouse gas emissions. Electricity production and transportation are similar because the driving force behind both of these factors is the burning of fossil fuels. It would be a lot easier to give up living with electricity than it would be to give up eating all together.
BOLD, BUT TRUE STATEMENT: Agriculture is significantly more important than electricity production simply for the fact that the human race NEEDS agriculture (food production) to live. Benjamin Franklin didn’t discover electricity until 1752 — this means the world lived without electricity for A MINIMUM of 1,752 years yet we have needed to live with agriculture since the dawn of time.
Industry accounts for 22.2 percent of greenhouse gas emissions while commercial and residential living accounts for 11.6 percent and, you guessed it, is backed by the burning of fossil fuels as well as certain chemicals. I support the gas and oil industry (I’m from Texas, how could I not?) but I have to ask: If the main four biggest contributors of greenhouse gas emissions are being caused by burning fossil fuels — why aren’t activists coming for companies such as Exxon or Shell?
Agriculture is responsible for nine percent of greenhouse gas emissions which come from livestock, agricultural soils and rice production. Okay, so our industry does contribute to around one-tenth of greenhouse gas emissions, obviously, this is not optimal — but it’s the price we pay to eat.
There are five basic needs every human must have in order to live: Oxygen, clean water, shelter, sleep and — last but not least — food. Think about everything you own: your car, your bed, the oven in your kitchen, your TV… we can live without all of these things, they’re luxuries. We lived without these things for thousands of years and if it came down to it, we could do it again. But agriculture is the sole source of food, it is something we legitimately cannot live without. Suggesting we stop agricultural production is suggesting extinction of the human race, a claim which is drastic and bogus.
Although the halt of agricultural production is drastic, many people seem to suggest it as a solution. Here’s my comprehensive list of other drastic solutions which could be made to decrease greenhouse gas emissions:
Transportation: If everyone in the U.S. got rid of their gas-guzzling vehicles and went back to walking or riding horseback everywhere, we would reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Electricity production: If everyone in the U.S. agreed to live without electricity, there would be no need to burn fossil fuels for the production of electricity and we would reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Industry: If every factory in the U.S. agreed to close its doors, leaving MILLIONS of Americans without a job, we would reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Commercial and Residential: If everyone in the world would, again, agree to live without electricity — and keep in mind, this would mean small things such as microwaves and Netflix wouldn’t be around, but also current medical tools and practices such as X-Ray technology and heart monitors — we would reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
If you are willing to give up agriculture, then you should be willing to give up transportation, electricity, industrial work and common, household electrical items.
I want you to go to your internet browser and type in www.worldometers.info/world-population/ and look at the number on the screen – 7.7 billion. The world is currently populated by 7.7 billion people and that number increases every second. That is 7.7 billion mouths to feed — how can we expect to feed 7.7 billion people without agriculture? These 7.7 billion people can live without transportation, electricity and the burning of fossil fuels, but they can’t live without agriculture.
I’m going to leave you with something I’ve said many times in this column and will continue to preach: Agriculture isn’t destroying the planet — agriculture is feeding it.
