Ariana A. Rivera

ENGL 11000

Prof. Elizabeth Von Uhl

February 25, 2020

   The Correlation Between Meat Production and Climate Change

In an age where climate change has become a more pressing issue than ever, countries all over the world are discussing ways to reduce humanity’s carbon footprint before it’s too late. There have been many efforts put into place to eliminate the increasing threat of global warming, some more effective than others, but an unlikely solution to decreasing carbon emissions is reducing the production of meat. Raising farm animals requires a large amount of agriculture which affects the ecosystem of those areas immensely and contributes greatly to deforestation. Between the carbon emissions of livestock that make up for 18% of global emissions and the mass amounts of deforestation brought about to sustain their living, meat production can be very detrimental to our environment. This is why more attention should be brought to the possibility of decreasing the production of meat and the amount of meat people intake per year for the overall betterment of the planet.

 In the science journal Nature Research, the article Eat less meat: UN climate-change report calls for change to the human diet, the German correspondent Quirin Shiermeir informs the reader about a report commissioned by the United Nations that states how without changes in human diets, agriculture, and global land-use any efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will not be as effective in impacting climate change. The report states that in people adopting plant-based diets and reducing meat consumption overall they are not only benefiting their own health but benefitting the climate’s health as well. Ecologist Hans-Otto Portner is quoted in the article as stating that “it would indeed beneficial, for both climate and human health, if people in many rich countries consumed less meat.” Shiermeir also goes on to explain how by consuming less meat, people would be preserving many kilometers of land that are destroyed by deforestation, stating that “dietary changes could free up several millions of square kilometers of land, and reduce global CO2 emissions by up to eight billion tonnes per year.” (Shermier, 2019)

In the blog post, published on World Resources Institute titled 6 Pressing Questions About Beef and Climate Change, Answered, Richard Wait answers common questions asked based on the correlation of beef and climate change. He goes on to explain that the negative effect beef has on climate change comes from a combination of both ruminant animals like cows’ ability to “emit methane, a potent greenhouse gas, as they digest grasses and plants” (Wait, 2019)  and the increasing amount of trees cut down on land used as pastures. In addition, he also explains how though the production of beef itself is detrimental to the environment the amount of land dedicated to agriculture provides a more serious threat to the government’s ability to stop climate change, which is shown in the blog post where it states “an acre of land devoted to food production is often an acre that could store far more carbon if allowed to grow forest or its native vegetation.” (Wait, 2019)

In the academic journal Natural Resources & Environment article From Farm-to-Table to Lab-to-Table, Scott Shulman informs the reader that “Meat that is cultured in a lab and grown outside of the animal is currently being developed and likely will be available for purchase in the near future.” (Shulman, 2018) This alternative to modern livestock and agriculture production provides a way to meet the increasing need for meat without using an excessive amount of land resources and producing an excessive amount of greenhouse gases because of it. With the discovery of stem cells in the 1980s the idea of creating meat from a lab became more feasible and used as a more eco-friendly alternative to producing meat than by simply using pre-existing agriculture to do so. As meat consumption continues to increase with the human population the need for a more sustainable source of food has become more apparent, so Shulman stresses that not only will producing meat by a lab will be better for the environment as a whole, but provide a more sustainable source of meat altogether.

In the multidisciplinary journal Food Policy, the article Fear of climate change consequences and predictors of intentions to alter meat consumption Erik Hunter explains that in exploring “food context in order to understand the factors which motivate consumers to reduce or alter their meat consumption” (Hunter, 2016)  he argues that the key to convincing meat consumerists to alter their meat consumption is through “increasing their self-efficacy towards adopting meat alternatives and educating them on the importance their actions have in reducing the threat.” (Hunter, 2016) Many consumerists are resistant to changing their dietary practices, however by educating them on the amount of damage the production of meat does to the environment and how it affects climate change people are more likely to feel motivated to change. By introducing the idea that by consuming alternatives to the meat we are substantially decreasing the number of greenhouse gases we produce, people feel more compelled to change their dietary habits for the greater good of the planet.

Rhetorical Situation: The author of Eat less meat: UN climate-change report calls for change to the human diet felt the need to write it because of the pressing issue of global warming in our society.  With many efforts taken by different nations to stop climate change falling short, the need for an effective change is of the utmost importance. The author wanted to bring light to the negative effects of meat production on the environment due to deforestation and how by simply changing our diet we can substantially decrease our greenhouse gas emission. Climate change has been a current issue for a long time, but especially now as things continue to get worse. So, the author wanted to introduce one of the most effective methods of stopping climate change to the readers of the journal. In addition, the author presented different ways countries around the world are decreasing the amount of meat their citizens consume.

The author of 6 Pressing Questions About Beef and Climate Change, Answered felt the need to write it in order to answer common questions about the correlation between climate change and beef. With the whole concept of beef affecting climate change circulating around social media, the author wanted to answer commonly asked questions about global warming and beef so, people can be more educated on the concept altogether. By educating people on this matter, they may decide to make a dietary change that could greatly impact the effectiveness of methods used by different nations to prevent climate change from reaching an all-time high. The organization used to publicize this blog has all sorts of articles on how to secure a more sustainable environment on this planet. Therefore, the rhetorical situation of this article is not just affected by the author of the blog’s desire to bring awareness to the relationship between beef and climate change, but also by the goals of the global organization itself.

The author of From Farm-to-Table to Lab-to-Table felt the need to write it because though he sees the effect restricting meat consumption has on the environment, he also brings up a healthier alternative to producing meat in a modern way. Currently, the production of meat requires a large amount of agriculture which affects the ecosystem of each area differently. The author also sees that as the need for meat goes up with the population number, we as a society need to find a more sustainable source of food. So, the author brings up the process of producing meat in a lab to explain how it is and why not only this method will benefit the environment in the long run, but also the human race as a whole. 

The author of the article Fear of climate change consequences and predictors of intentions to alter meat consumption felt the need to write it in order to inform the audience on ways to convince people to consume less meat. The multidisciplinary journal this article was published in specializes in exploring the economic and social aspects of food policy, so the creation of the article was also influenced by where it would be appearing and what sort of audience it should appeal to. Since a lot of activists speaking on global warming use threats to stress the importance of altering our ways in order to ensure a safer environment, the article shows a study where the effectiveness of fear used to convince people on global warming is not as high as simply educating people on the matter. The author explains that people are more likely to care about climate change once they realize how it would affect other’s lives rather than their own, and in an age where many activists are trying to get people on board with stopping climate change, the tactics given in this article can be extremely helpful to those trying to bring awareness to the topic. 

Genre and Medium: The genre of the first article is a science journal and the medium is the CCNY database. Nature is a weekly journal that covers topics from around the world and publishes research that is peer-reviewed in all fields of science. In its mission statement, it states Nature’s first mission is “To serve scientists through prompt publication of significant advances in any science.” So, knowing the journal’s purpose it makes sense why the article would be about global warming, an issue backed by science that people just now are finding effective solutions for.

The genre of the second source is a blog post found on an organization that brings awareness to different global challenges and the medium is a website. On its website, it states that “WRI has earned a reputation for practical solutions and global impact based on rigorous analysis and deep long-term engagement with government, corporations, city leaders and communities.” Though the blog post seems to be strictly informational because of the organization it is associated with, it also seems to lean towards providing enough information to persuade people to restrict their meat intake in order to benefit the environment.

The genre of the third article is from an academic journal called Natural Resources & Environment and the medium is the CCNY database (Gale General OneFile). This academic journal is described as “An academic and professional journal for those who practice or teach environmental law.” meaning that it specifically covers certain environmental issues or in this case a possible solution to one of them. The article describes how the process of producing meat in a lab works and how it can benefit the environment. This article seems to serve as persuasion as to why someone may choose to consume meat created in a lab and why this way will benefit humanity and the environment as a whole. 

The genre of the fourth article is from a multidisciplinary journal that focuses on food policy and its medium is the CCNY database (Gale General OneFile). Food Policy describes its main focus on its website as “the economic and social aspect of food policy.” The author himself talks about how to alter someone’s perspective on changing their diet to restrict or not include meat altogether which is very on-brand to the journal’s focus on food policy and the main theme of each article being to show how restricting meat can benefit the environment.

Author and Audience: The audience in each article is very diverse as are the authors. Though, each author has the credentials to be commenting on such a widespread issue as climate change each has a different way of going about it. For the first article the author, Quirin Schiermier has written about science and policies in Germany since 1999 and has spoken about climate-related issues many times in the past which makes his insight on this topic credible. In addition to writing for Nature, he also worked as a cartographer, which is a career that requires an understanding of the environment and geography.  For the blog, author Richard Waite holds an M.A. in International Development Studies with a focus on Environments and Food Security which makes his views on subjects like food and climate change credible.  For the third article, author Scott Schulman works for The Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility which works toward exposing environmental wrongdoings that go on within the government, and because of this, his article is credible since he addresses issues like climate change facing our planet for a living. For the fourth article, Erik Hunter is an assistant professor at the Swedish University of Agricultural Science and has done numerous research papers that are on issues our planet faces which makes his article credible.  As for the audience overall, each of the articles and the blog post are presented on websites that are used to promote different articles relating to the goal of bringing awareness to different environmental issues going on in our world. So, assuming the audience specifically searched for articles on climate change and or different environmental issues going on worldwide, the audience would be people looking to learn more about climate change and ways to prevent it.

Stance and Language: The stance of each source is that because climate change is an important issue that is going on in our society, which is why we need to restrict the amount of meat that we are producing and find alternative ways to supply people with meat. In the blog post, the author states “Beef-related emissions are also projected to grow. Building from an FAO projection, we estimated that global demand for beef and other ruminant meats could grow by 88 percent between 2010 and 2050, putting enormous pressure on forests, biodiversity and the climate,” (Wait, 2019) emphasizing how detrimental the production and eventual consumption of meat is for our environment especially in the years to come. In the first article, the author states “By 2050, dietary changes could free up several million square kilometers of land, and reduce global CO2 emissions by up to eight billion tonnes per year, relative to business as usual, the scientists estimate (see ‘What if people ate less meat?’),” (Shermier, 2019)  demonstrating the positive effects the restriction of meat has on deforestation and our carbon emissions. The other two articles focus mainly on using lab-produced meat and convincing people to change their dietary habits by expressing how global warming affects society as a whole. Overall, though the language might differ for each source the stance remains the same as none of the sources are arguing against making dietary changes to improve climate change. 

Tone and Purpose: The purpose of each source is to bring awareness to the benefits of excluding meat from our diets (beef in particular) and or eating alternatives to the way meat is produced for the environment. Though each source uses many citations and logical reasoning to present their information overall they are strictly informative. No source has a different stance than the other and often information overlaps depending on what is being brought up on the topic. The tone of each source is formal with the exception of the blog post which is more conversational (partially because of the type of medium it is being presented on). The two sources that touch on the different ways to convince a person of changing their diet for the greater good and the production of meat in a lab seem more persuasive in their tone, but overall though each source mentions why other people might disagree with their point, providing a fair argument of why it is necessary to stop global warming by changing our dietary habits.

   Works Cited

Hunter, Erik, and Elin Röös. “Fear of Climate Change Consequences and Predictors of Intentions to Alter Meat Consumption.” Food Policy, Pergamon, 27 June 2016, www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030691921630077X.

Schiermeier, Quirin. “Eat Less Meat: UN Climate-Change Report Calls for Change to Human Diet.” Nature News, Nature Publishing Group, 8 Aug. 2019, www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02409-7

Schulman, Scott. “From Farm-to-Table to Lab-to-Table.” Natural Resources & Environment, vol. 33, no. 1, Summer 2018, p. 31+. Gale General OneFile, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A588473485/ITOF?u=cuny_ccny&sid=ITOF&xid=b891c380

Waite, Richard, et al. “6 Pressing Questions About Beef and Climate Change, Answered.” World Resources Institute, 13 Sept. 2019, www.wri.org/blog/2019/04/6-pressing-questions-about-beef-and-climate-change-answered.