How The Collapse Of Our Agriculture Effects The Entire World

The articles “The Climate Crisis at the End of Our Fork” by Anna Lappe and “Why Bother?” by Michael Pollan urge us to see the connections between food and the environment. In the article “The Climate Crisis at the End of Our Fork”, Lappe insists the methods used in food production and distribution have a massive impact on the planet. In the article “Why Bother”, Pollan provides us reasons why people should bother to help stop global warming. There are three main causes between food production and food distribution that play a big role in global warming. Changing the way food is produced and distributed could diminish the dangerous effects of global warming. However, in order to stop global warming everyone has to assist as a group instead of individuals.

cutting down forests in Brazil, as well as setting wildfires in places like west Texas cause “carbons stored in trees” to escape. Individuals don't understand that in places like “Brazil,” deforestation causes more emissions than “all of the world's cars.” There are other forms of greenhouse gases as well; like “Methane” released from “Rice Farming, Petroleum drilling, and even cattle bleaching” (Friedman 35). Over “10 Billion” animals are raised for Factory Farms in the United states. Burning Fossil Fuels for fertilizer creates up to “41 million metric tons” of Carbon Dioxide. The Factory Farm industry contributes to air pollution by emitting Greenhouse Gases such as “Hydrogen Sulfide, Ammonia and Methane” (DoSomething Web). Factory Farms is something that can easily be changed by switching to smaller meat establishments, where the common public already expects the meat to come from.

Senator Everett Dirksen once noted “The oilcan is mightier than the sword”. In today’s world, it is easy to see why oil can be considered the most important resource to hold. Without oil, many of the common day occurrences we take for granted would be impossible. Oil is used for almost everything; from the fuel used to drive our vehicles, to the plastics used in every facet of life, and providing the heat needed to live through the winter. In fact, the United States depends so much on oil that as a nation it uses over 20 million barrels a day. Importing oil increases the total costs because of the need to transport it from around the world. It is estimated

Without access to fuel, industry is hindered. The time it takes to travel from point a to point b increases tremendously if there is a limit to the amount of fuel that one has access to. In the 1970’s during an “oil crisis”, gas stations limited customers to 10 gallons each. The need to stop at more gas stations more often will increase shipping time, decrease productivity, and hinder new nations in their development and entrance into the postmodern marketplace.

Michael Pollan (2009) believes that the dependence on a fossil-fuel based food distribution system is toxic both to the environment and to the human body. Cows and other

Brought up in the southern of China, I often heard about that people from there “eat anything with four limbs except tables, anything that flies except aero planes, and anything that swims except ships”. Nevertheless, I eat more fruit, vegetables, nuts, and whole grains but less meat to make careful choices for environmental protection. Similarly, Kathy Freston argues that animal agriculture is one of the top contributors to global warming. In her Huffington Post selection “Vegetarian Is the New Prius,” Freston lists how many emissions of greenhouse gases people make when they eat meat and illustrates the consumption of tree in animal agriculture. She effectively convinces her audiences that the livestock results in the most serious environmental problems and encourages people to lead a greener diet to protect our environment. However, ardent craving, poor health, and perpetual hassle and cost prevent all Americans from being vegetarian.

The main idea of the article is that; Rebecca Solnit discusses about our dependency on fossil fuels which is hazardous for the planet. Rebecca Solnit starts off the article by examining a document which was created when French Revolution was coming to an end where the new fundamentals were set and new government was born. Human beings have the power to change anything in the society. When it comes to Americans, they think that they do not have the power to change a defect in the society but during the history, Americans are the ones that changed everything. The planet climate is changing due to the fossil fuels and it is people’s responsibility to request for a change. Politics is not inescapable. People have a right to question the government

As argued in the article, America burns large quantities of fossil fuel to ship things all over the country and even the world. Pollan first thought that was Salatin’s reasons for “keeping his food chain so short,” when he arrived Pollan found out it was of “local food systems.” I contend that burning the fuels that are in the cars to drive out to the farms is probably almost as bad as the fossil fuels for shipping the food all over the country. Another point that is argued, is “local is not necessarily mean it’s organic or even sustainable” (Pollan 4). Just because the food is “locally grown” doesn’t mean that it is healthy. Farmers that sell and send their food across the state or country have to spray the food with preservatives to preserve the food longer. The preserved food is not organic because it is not as fresh and natural as it could be. The food products that are shipped all over the country and even the world cause growing globalization, consumption patterns, and concomitant social and biological diversity (O’Hara 534). Shipping local food products to different parts of the world bring the world together and share the different cultures through food. Pollan also states that you won’t find anything “microwavable” at a

Fossil fuels are considered to be natural products that are made from the remains of organisms that were once living, and is a non-renewable resource (Yvonne, Locke, 1) that has a big impact on our earth, but now people are trying to find ways to lower the earth’s carbon footprint. The fossil fuel industry is one that has been around for a very long time and is something that contributes in our everyday living, but now fossil fuel is something that is being considered precious material, and the way that we as consumers use it will have a big impact on the shape of our future country (Fossil Fuels 1). With all of this oil being collected in Canada it has a big effect on the economic spectrum as well

In his paper, Pollan discusses the reliance on fossil fuels for agriculture, public health issues, and food security problems. He proposes policy that promotes alternative, local farming. Lyson describes a shift from craft to mass production, the consolidation of farms, and the disembedding of agriculture from the community. He discusses how civic economies challenge the market based agriculture system. Kloppenburg discusses how our current foodshed is built on a market economy and distances people from their food sources. Berry describes the problems of land consolidation, the industrialization of agriculture, and a culture of distancing people from farms. He proposes instituting more community based food systems. Although these authors discuss important economic, social, and environmental problems

Bartlett's demonstration of the noted setting of the general fossil fuel use, he raises it as a thankfulness by giving a little regard to the possibility that it were prior. Secured for gathering of those, the hydrocarbons which are under the Cold will have eaten up by the United States in one annum. Thusly, there will be such an incomparable total in figures in Bartlett's point that it might be dead by now and it may deliberate only on his core of improvement usage as contrasting to the exponential change of employment. It greatly need an endless disclosure of two sides and the individual normal usage of resource. On this limited world, which is essentially incalculable Bartlett doesn't agree the submission that bio-powers which will be able to this issue by showing out what business made out of agriculture makes the provisions by retrieving the region. Thusly, utilizing the progress to pass on biofuels is maintained to be a zero entire entertainment (R. Edwards, A. (2005). Sustainable enlargement. In The Sustainability Revolution (2nd ed., Vol. 6, pp. 20-55). New

In this essay, I will defend the argument that the United States has a moral obligation to abolish meat and dairy subsidies in order to mitigate the adverse affects of climate change. Cows and other livestock emit a large portion of the world’s total greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere, more than the entire transportation industry. Yet, the meat and dairy industry has faced few if any regulations to attempt to decrease these emissions. By abolishing these subsidies, the production of meat and dairy products would decrease and this would lead to a decrease of methane emitted into the atmosphere at no adverse cost to the human population. Clearly, decreasing the amount of methane in the atmosphere is favorable in our attempt to mitigate the effects of global warming which would decrease future human suffering. I argue that if a policy will help the human population avoid serious human suffering from climate change without any serious adverse effects on the population, than the United States has a moral obligation to enact that policy. Abolishing meat and dairy subsidies is one of these policies and therefore the United States has a moral obligation to abolish meat and dairy subsidies. I will raise an objection to this argument on the basis that it is not guaranteed that the ending of subsidies to the meat and dairy industry would lead to a decreased production of meat and dairy products in the long

These are two extremes, but people who live in the developed world on average still eat twice as much meat compared to people living in developing countries. And while people in developing countries might consume less meat and dairy now, growing populations and wealth will strongly increase their consumption. This will have negative impacts on the environment - and on ourselves. More than 25% of climate gases that contribute to climate change are associated with our food. This is also expected to increase over the next decades. But our diets are not only unsustainable, they are also unhealthy leading to malnourishment and obesity.

“The UN along with other agencies reported that not only did livestock play a major role in global warming, it is also the leading cause of resource consumption and environmental degradation destroying the planet today.” (Andersen & Kuhn, 2014). It is important, then, to consider the effects of animal agriculture on the environment. This essay will argue that animal agriculture is harmful to the environment in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, water- and land use, and that policies in the form of subsidizing plant foods, altering the Canada Food Guide, and creating plant based nutrition coaching and support groups should be enacted to solve these problems. The first section of this paper will outline scholarly literature on the effects of animal agriculture on the environment. This paper will then discuss why a plant based diet is also suitable for optimal health. Finally, this essay will conclude with an overview of the various social policies that must be executed to solve these environmental issues.

“We’ve got complacency,” he sums up. “So for those reasons, I believe the next food crisis – when it comes – will be a bigger shock than $150 oil.”