Marcia Pimentel

Sustainability of meat-based and plant-based diets and the environment

Worldwide, an estimated 2 billion people live primarily on a meat-based diet, while an estimated 4 billion live primarily on a plant-based diet. The US food production system uses about 50% of the total US land area, 80% of the fresh water, and 17% of the fossil energy used in the country. The heavy dependence on fossil energy suggests that the US food system, whether meat-based or plant-based, is not sustainable. The use of land and energy resources devoted to an average meat-based diet compared with a lactoovovegetarian (plant-based) diet is analyzed in this report. In both diets, the daily quantity of calories consumed are kept constant at about 3533 kcal per person. The meat-based food system requires more energy, land, and water resources than the lactoovovegetarian diet. In this limited sense, the lactoovovegetarian diet is more sustainable than the average American meat-based diet.

The Value of Forests to World Food Security

We assembled information on the contribution and value of forests to world food security. An assessment was made of the role of forests and non-timber products in the food system of developing countries. We estimated that upwards of 300 million people annually earn part or all of their livelihood and food from forests. A total of about

Natural resources and an optimum human population.

90 billion in non-timber products are harvested each year. Forests also help to protect land, water, and biological resources, and they play an important role in maintaining the productivity of agricultural and environmental systems.

Impact of Population Growth on Food Supplies and Environment

The interdependencies of [the natural resources required to sustain human life] and their current and projected future status are analyzed in this paper. We propose an optimum population for the United States and the world based on a high standard of living while maintaining the sustainability of renewable resources and the environment. The goal is to determine the population size that will insure the possibility of individual prosperity for everyone while maintaining a quality environment. (EXCERPT)

World Population, Food, Natural Resources, and Survival

This article presents a discussion of the impact of world population growth on available natural resources and the demands for food and water. Currently 1-2 billion people are already malnourished due to insufficient food low incomes and inadequate food distribution. A doubling of population in under 50 years to 12 billion will result in increasingly severe food problems and an estimated 3 billion malnourished. The US National Academy of Sciences and the scientists of the Royal Society issued a joint statement about the growing imbalance between people and food. The UN Food and Agriculture Organization reported that the 80% of the available world food supply that is devoted to world grains per capita declined over the past 15 years. With projected population increases the declines and additional grains needed for the addition of more people will greatly increase the pressure on land and water resources. An ample food supply is dependent upon ample fertile land fresh water energy and biodiversity. Almost 33% or 1.5 billion hectares of the worlds cropland was abandoned due to soil erosion and unproductivity. Replacement of eroded land is coming from marginal and forest land. 60-80% of deforestation is attributed to land acquisition for agricultural purposes. Available cropland per capita is now only 0.27 hectares per capita in the world. US or European diet requires 0.50 hectares per capita. Food shortages are related to lower land productivity and shortages of productive cropland. Agricultural production requires about 87% of the worlds freshwater and a significant amount of the worlds supply of fossil fuel. About 40% of world population competes for shared water resources. Food importation may not be viable at some point in the future. Today about 183 nations are dependent on food imports. A high standard of living is possible with 200 million fewer people in the US and 2 billion fewer people in the world.

Plant,Animal, and Microbe Invasive Species in the United States and World

The survival of the human population and the vital environment that supports it is threatened by overpopulation. Entering the new millennium, stark contrasts are apparent between the availability of natural resources of our earth and the billions of humans who require them for their survival. Each day about a quarter million people are added to the more than 6 billion that already exist. Yet, the availability of natural resources that support human life, like food, fresh water, quality soil, energy, and biodiversity are being degraded, polluted, and depleted.

Conunent: Adverse Envirornmental Consequences of the Green Revolution

Approximately 50,000 plant, animal, and microbe invasive species are present in the United States, and an estimated 500,000 plant, animal, and microbe invasive species have invaded other nations of the world. Immediately, it should be pointed out that the US and world agriculture depend on introduced food crops and livestock.Approximately 99 % of all crops and livestock in all nations are intentionally introduced plants, animals, and microbes (Pimentel 2002). Worldwide, the value of agriculture (including beneficial non-indigenous species) is estimated to total

Human Population Growth

30 trillion per year. Other exotic species have been introduced for landscape restoration, biological pest control, sport, and food processing, also contributing significant benefits. Calculating the negative economic impacts associated with the invasion of exotic species is difficult.For a few species, there are sufficient data to estimate some impacts on agriculture, forestry, fisheries, public health, and the natural ecosystem in the US and worldwide. In this article, we estimate the magnitude of the economic benefits, and environmental and economic costs associated with a variety of invasive species that exist in the United States and elsewhere in the world.

Impact of the Energy Crisis on Food and Nutrition Systems

THE NEW AGRICULTURAL TECHNOLOGIES, energy inputs, and crop varieties that together are known as the Green Revolution are widely accepted as a resounding success in raising agricultural yields in much of the Third World. The Green Revolution seemingly banished what had been projected as imminent food shortages in many countries as populations continued to grow at annual rates of 2 to 3 percent. Optimists could envisage increases in yields continuing indefinitely, as agricultural production was put on a sound technological footing supported by a modern research and development infrastructure. Early fears of labor displacement were shown to be misplaced: the crop regime required as much or more labor as before. Implicit in such rosy scenarios, however, is the assumption that the Green Revolution does not have adverse side effects on the environment-on the immediate physical bases of production and on the broader physical setting in which the rural population lives. That assumption, we argue, is false. This comment briefly examines the environmental impacts of the Green Revolution and suggests that they call into question the long-run sustainability, let alone the long-run further growth, of high agricultural yields. In some instances they are potentially damaging to public health. We conclude that this technological route cannot be seen as an alternative to urgent action to stem population growth. Focused mainly on enhanced yield, the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research that developed the crop plant improvement for the Green Revolution paid little or no attention to how this new technology would affect the quality of the environment (Baum, 1987). Pesticide use in Green Revolution rice production, for example, was reported to increase sevenfold over levels used in traditional rice production (Subramanian et al., 1973). Despite this increased use of insecticides there is no proof that losses due to insects in rice have been reduced; rather, at best such losses have

Food, energy, and society

Ecological engineering may help us understand the causes of human population growth and impacts on environmental resources. In the coming decades, the survival of humans and the security of environmental resources that support human existence will continue to be threatened by rapid population growth. As we enter the new millennium, stark contrasts are already apparent between the availability of these natural resources and the billions of humans who require them to sustain life. Ecological engineering may help us understand the complexities of the problem and hopefully, may help us devise ways to meet the challenges created by rapid world population growth. To halt the imbalance growing between human population numbers and their essential resources, humans must actively conserve cropland, freshwater, energy, and the other basic environmental resources. There is a critical need to alert the public worldwide to the serious issues of overpopulation and natural resource shortages. Certainly populations in developed countries could contribute to the conservation effort by reducing their high consumption of all resources, especially fossil fuels. Focus is needed on improving food crops, such as developing perennial grains, pest-resistant crops, and improved nutritional makeup of crops.