We all recognize climate change, but it often feels overwhelming or like we can’t make a difference. The challenges seem too big to overcome, and it’s easy to feel powerless in the face of such a vast issue. However, the first step to making real change is understanding the problem, especially when it comes to the negative impact of food production, something that overlaps with our lives at least three times a day.
A major contributor to environmental harm is meat production. The number of animals raised for slaughter now outweighs wild mammals by a factor of 15 to 1. This shocking imbalance is a significant driver of the 14.5% of global greenhouse gas emissions attributed to meat and dairy, primarily from methane released by cattle and the energy required for livestock processing and transportation. Beyond emissions, meat production also consumes vast resources; for instance, 1800 gallons of water are needed to produce just one pound of beef. In addition to these environmental concerns, industrial meat farming raises serious ethical issues. Factory farms, driven by the need for efficiency, prioritize profit over animal welfare, cramming animals into overcrowded and unclean spaces, resulting in their physical and mental suffering. These issues highlight the need for alternatives that are not only more humane but also more sustainable. The good news is that there are sustainable, protein-rich alternatives to meat. Foods like tempeh, tofu, and lentils provide sufficient protein without the same environmental toll, helping to reduce our reliance on resource-heavy and often harmful meat production. And even without giving up meat entirely, simply cutting back—even by just 25%—could significantly lower greenhouse gas emissions by 5-7%.
Another contributor to environmental harm is industrial agriculture’s dependence on monoculture, the practice of growing a single crop over large areas of land. Driving through farming regions, you may see endless fields of a single crop—a prime example of monoculture. While this technique is efficient for large-scale food production, it comes with serious environmental costs. One major issue is soil depletion. Growing the same crop year after year strips the soil of essential nutrients, making it less fertile over time. To fix this, farmers rely heavily on chemical fertilizers, which further damage soil health and lead to erosion and weaker crops. Monoculture also makes crops more vulnerable to pests and diseases, leading to more pesticide use, which harms beneficial insects and local ecosystems. Additionally, monoculture contributes to deforestation. Large areas of natural land are cleared to plant crops in high demand, destroying habitats and causing significant biodiversity loss, which makes ecosystems more fragile and less able to cope with climate change.
This destruction is only furthered by the dominance of industrial farms over the agricultural domain. In the US, government subsidies are financial programs that help farmers cover costs, stabilize food production, and ensure a steady food supply. However, these subsidies tend to favor large industrial farms over small, independent ones. This system hurts both small farmers and the environment. Subsidies allow industrial farms to keep growing large monoculture crops even though they cause harm to the land. Additionally, industrial farming is built around mass production and global distribution, which means food often has to travel long distances before it reaches consumers. These long transportation routes increase carbon emissions and energy use. On the other hand, local farms use fewer resources and have a smaller environmental footprint. They are more likely to employ more sustainable farming practices like crop rotation and organic farming, which both help preserve soil health and reduce the need for chemical fertilizers and pesticides. Moreover, because they sell directly to nearby communities, local farms need less packaging, refrigeration, and transportation, which further cuts down on emissions and waste.
Finally, it is not only the production of food but also what happens after it that affects the environment. Despite the existence of more than enough food production to properly feed the entire world, millions still suffer from hunger due to the real problem: an inefficient allocation of resources. A significant portion of food is discarded due to imperfections, inefficiencies, overproduction, or overconsumption. This waste not only worsens food insecurity but also contributes to environmental issues. For example, rotting food in landfills releases methane, an incredibly harmful greenhouse gas, and also wastes the water, energy, and labor used to produce it. Addressing food waste through better distribution systems, donation programs, and consumer awareness can help bridge the polarization between those with a disproportionate amount of food and those with those with a disproportionate need for it.
Tackling the environmental impacts of food production may seem overwhelming and too big a problem for one person to solve, but real change happens when individuals take action: it starts with people like you and me. This problem requires a combination of individual and systemic changes. Individual changes like reducing food waste through better storage, meal planning, and composting can significantly lower methane emissions. Eating a more plant-based diet, even if it’s just reducing meat consumption rather than eliminating it entirely, helps lower greenhouse gas emissions and resource use. You can also help support systemic changes by supporting sustainable farming—whether through advocacy or conscious purchasing. Though they might seem further away from you, you can also support policy changes that promote fairer subsidies and food redistribution programs. You’ve already completed step one—learning this information. Now, you just have to share it with others and start implementing it in your daily life. Environmental action doesn’t have to be overcomplicated, and your actions are proof.
