Eady 1

Grayson Eady
Mrs. Taylor
AP Language
7 November 2016
No More Meat: The Future of Sustainable Food
I live in Georgia, a place where food is the epicenter of culture, and meat reigns.
Georgians can hardly have a meal without a juicy, grilled steak or a crispy, fried chicken breast.
We Southerners have become so accustomed to the idea that meat is integral to every meal and
that vegetarian and vegan lifestyles are subject to ridicule. I grew up immersed in this culture, yet
I rebelled. The reason? Sustainability. As a sixteen-year-old student, I am often expected to show
apathy towards or feel powerless in response to global issues, but I could not sit idly by once I
became aware of the sustainability issues within the animal agriculture industry. I have always
been an active environmentalist and a leader at my school; it seemed wrong for me to abstain
from action on food issues because it was inconvenient. How could I?
After giving up meat, I began to realize that meat and sustainability are not often
discussed in the same context, with even the most influential environmental interest groups
refusing to advertise the two as related. For years, animal husbandry, a significant contributor to
climate change, water shortages, and starvation, has been overlooked as a detrimental aspect of
our diets. Only just recently have there been reports of the harmful effects of such food-raising
practices. I often hear environmental leaders telling people to turn off the faucet and drive
hybrids while society waits for some great change in the current environmental crisis. Let me
give you an example. Prior to learning about the value of vegetarianism, I subscribed to that
same Al Gore-esque, eco-friendly, daily checklist. However, the United Nations reports that

Eady 2
animal agriculture, or the practice of raising animals for food products, accounted for as much as
eighteen percent of annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in 2006, meaning that livestock are
contributing more to climate change than our cars (Livestocks). The fact that my family eats
virtually no meat positively impacts the environment more than my dads new plug-in hybrid.
Because the footprint of animal agriculture is likely to grow more destructive over time, I believe
legislative and social measures must be taken to deter increases in meat production and
consumption in order to truly combat climate change and solve foods (in my opinion) weightiest
problem: sustainability.
Climate change poses a serious threat to humans as a species and a civilization, and the
fight against man-made climate change involves food more than I thought. Cattle and other
livestock used for food have been responsible for significant carbon emissions. In fact, I came
across an article from the Environmental Protection Agency stating that animal husbandry
contributes almost as much to pollution from methane as the natural gas industry (Sources).
Methane has a global warming potential more than twenty-five times greater than that of carbon
dioxide, and our hamburgers are one of the largest sources (Sources). Even more concerning is
the amount of nitrous oxide produced by way of animal husbandry. I discovered that the Food
and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations has determined that the industry releases
sixty-five percent of nitrous oxide gas produced by human related activities (Livestocks). More
potent than methane, nitrous oxide has almost three-hundred times the warming potential of
carbon dioxide (Livestocks). Think about it. With animal growers contributing so intensely to
climate change, the need for comprehensive agriculture reform has become increasingly
pressing. Is a hamburger really more important than our atmosphere?

Eady 3
While emissions are the most obvious reasons for climate change, rainforest destruction
also causes significant detriment to the environment. To my surprise, livestock act as the leading
drivers for rainforest destruction, and according to the World Bank, up to ninety-one percent of
Amazon clearing is for cattle grazing and other animal agriculture related activities (Margulis
36). Not only are greenhouse gasses being emitted at unprecedented rates due to agriculture, the
best lines of defense against such emissions are being threatened as well. The rainforests act as
Earths lungs. I need them. You need them. Meat production reeks of environmental degradation
from pollution to rainforest devastation, and I decided that I could no longer support such blatant
destruction of our planet.
I still struggle to understand how agricultural issues could be so widely ignored despite
the alarming proof that transportation and energy are not the only factors that pollute our planet.
Even though the sustainability problems within the food industry are not thoroughly discussed by
most people, they still remain pressing topics that need solutions. Obviously, all of the error and
malpractice occurring in food manufacturing cannot be legislated out of existence
instantaneously, but I do see one piece of legislation that would dramatically reduce the impact
of animal agriculture for any country that adopts it as policy: carbon tax. Carbon tax is not a new
idea; environmental interest groups have lobbied for taxes on large polluters for years. However,
I have only heard of carbon taxes being placed on the energy, transportation, and manufacturing
sectors. No one with a loud enough voice to be recognized calls for holding agribusinesses
responsible for their contributions. I believe that the necessary first step involves a carbon tax
that accounts for the footprint of the largescale production of meat and other animal products.
The human race must detach from its reliance on animal products if we expect the planet to

Eady 4
sustain us for generations to come, and the effect carbon taxes would have on the market could
provide the incentive for people to act in favor of the environment by giving up meat.
You may be asking: what is a carbon tax? Simply, it is a tax based on the carbon output
of a company or industry. In the case of animal raisers and their corporate subsidizers, a carbon
tax would mean less of an ability to profitably raise cattle and other livestock for meat or milk or
eggs. Think about the most basic principles of supply and demand. The demand for animal
products in the food industry is high, but a carbon tax would either reduce the supply directly or
translate to higher consumer costs as companies maintain pre-carbon tax supply levels. Over
time, the demand would decrease as prices increase due to the diminishing affordability of meat
and other products. A carbon tax could be the key to a seamless transition away from meat, and I
hope that environmental interest groups will soon see the importance of the connection between
the health of the environment and the production of our food and discuss agriculture when they
propose carbon taxes.
While taxing companies that contribute most to climate change very well has the
potential to shift the current track the food industry has decided to take, I do not think that
legislation alone from any government will be sufficient if society is going to tackle any
significant climate or food issue. In order for the most effective form of lasting change to take
place, we average citizens must come together and fulfill our duty to our planet. While most
citizens of the United States and of the Earth, are not necessarily in positions to propose
legislation, we can still take action. We can still choose to cut animal products out of our diets;
we do not need legislation to do so for us. Consider how food connects to so many areas of our
lives and how any improvement can positively affect a range of issues. This connection is the
reason I started a sustainable, organic garden at my school. I wanted my school, however small

Eady 5
an arena it is, to share the burden shifting its students to ecologically minded diets by providing
educational resources. This connection has also led me to dedicate time to discussing my own
dietary considerations with my classmates without judging their opinions. Sustainable food needs
champions, and setting examples for peers to follow and opening up a dietary dialogue are the
best ways to champion.
Global citizens will ultimately be the compelling force for the reinvention of food. I see
true global citizens as people who seek out knowledge of global issues and passionately
participate in finding solutions. Global citizens know the responsibility humans hold for each
other. They utilize their resources to address problems within their communities and take part in
worldwide movements for constructive change. In the case of agriculture, global citizens must
rally behind climate legislation while also kindling the vegetarian and movement. Awareness of
issues directly translates to responsibility to support their solutions.

Eady 6
Work Cited
Livestock's Long Shadow. Rep. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2006.
Web. 3 Nov. 2016.
Margulis, Sergio. Causes of Deforestation of Brazilian Amazon. Working paper no. 22. The
World Bank, Dec. 2003. Web. 5 Nov. 2016.
"Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions." EPA. Environmental Protection Agency, n.d. Web. 27
Oct. 2016.