1

THE IMPACT OF MEAT PRODUCTION ON THE

ENVIRONMENT ______________________________

Prashant Parikh

(Georgia Institute of Technology)

ISYE- Special Courses

06/07/2012

2

3

Table of Contents

Introduction to the Problem .............................................................................................................3

Feeding the Livestock ......................................................................................................................5

Environmental Impact of Slaughterhouse and Food Processing Plants...........................................8

Animal Waste Management Analysis ............................................................................................12

Environmental and Energy Analysis of Water Treatment .............................................................14

Packaging of Beef ..........................................................................................................................21

Transportation ................................................................................................................................23

Conclusion .....................................................................................................................................29

Works Cited ...................................................................................................................................31

4

Problem Introduction:

As responsible citizens of the 21st century, there is no doubt in our minds, that despite all

the speculations floating around, global warming is a real phenomenon, and needs to be

addressed very seriously.

Our Atmosphere is comprised of several gases; nitrogen being the most plentiful,

followed by oxygen , argon and carbon dioxide (by atmospheric volumes: 78.01%, 20.9%, 0.9%

and 0.039% respectively). There are also several trace molecules which make up the air.

Global warming is caused due to the greenhouse effect. For a perfect black body, the

incoming radiation of the sun would be equal to the outgoing radiation from the earth, but due to

the greenhouse effect, some of the heat energy of the sun gets trapped in our atmosphere due to

the internal motion of some gas molecules, and the incoming radiation of the sun is greater than

the outgoing radiation of the earth, and as a result there is a steady rise in temperature of our

planet.

This effect has been observed and documented for many decades now, and it has many

grave consequences. As shown in the figure below, one can see that co-related to an increase in

temperature, are rises in sea-water level by the melting of glaciers. Island nations such as the

Maldives have already witnessed the adverse effects of this phenomenon.

5

Figure 1: The figure above shows the correlation between the increase in global mean

temperature and global average sea level.

6

Feeding the Livestock

Carbon dioxide is a very potent greenhouse gas, especially owing to the fact that it has a

long resident time in the atmosphere. The sources of emission are many; in this paper we will be

exploring the impact that meat production has on global warming.

The human population is growing in numbers, and along with it, the demand for food

increases as well. We are living in a world where there is limited land, and limited resources. A

huge proportion of both these capitals are used for the production of our food. During the last

40 years, almost 500 million hectares of land have been converted to agricultural land, at the cost

of deforestation.

Seventy percent of all agricultural land, which is 30% of the worlds land surface area,

goes into life-stock production- by far the largest land use in the world is taken up by this

industry.

One study showed the amount of water required to produce one kilo of the following:

Maize : 900 litres; rice: 3000 litres; chicken: 3900 litres; pork: 4900 litres; beef: 15,500 litres

This goes to prove that more resources go into production of meat, than any crop; with beef

being the most resource hungry- using 17 times the amount of water, to produce an equal weight

of maize.

A 2006 study at the University of Chicago concluded that a person switching from a

typical American diet to a vegan diet with the same number of calories would prevent the

emission of 1485 kg of carbon dioxide. The difference exceeds that of an individual

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Chicagohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide

7

switching from a Toyota Camry to the hybrid Toyota Prius, and collectively amounts to

over 6% of the total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.

Let us perform some calculations to find out the amount of resources that go into

producing 1 kg of beef, focusing more on the big picture and keeping it simple.

Depending on the breed of the cow, it could weigh anywhere between 250 - 700 kilos, for

simplicitys sake, let us suppose it weighs 400 kg.

On average, a cow is slaughtered at 2 years of age; i.e. 730 days.

A cow eats close to 40 kg of feed on a daily basis

Total food over its lifetime = (40kgs

day) X (730 days) = 29200 kg

Ratio of feed consumed to weight of the cow = 29200kgs

400kgs=

Hence for every 1kg of beef, 73 kg of feed is used. Considering that not all body parts of

the cow are consumed, the ratio is even greater.

Now let us calculate how this translates into land use.

.

^ per year

1 =12

0.82= .

73 = (1.252)(73) = .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Camryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Priushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas

8

Compare with 1.25 of land for the production of crops. The eradication of such

wastefulness could in effect help alleviate some of the worlds hunger problems, if the

transportation, distribution and macro-economic policies are taken care of at the same time.

For arguments sake, let us see if it is sustainable for every human being on the planet to

consume only a diet of beef. A human eats approximately 1kg of food a day, let us suppose he

eats 0.25kg of beef on a per day basis; that roughly 90kgs a year. There are 6,900,000,000

humans (and counting) on the planet. Hence (6,900,000,000)(90) = , , ,

of beef consumed yearly.

(62100000000)(91.252)

=

= 510,000,000,000,000 2

= 14,633,840,000,000 2

5,666,625,000,000

14,633,840,000,000= %

Thirty eight percent of all available agricultural land is required to produce 0.25 kg of

beef for 6.9 billion people, for 1 year. This is not even sustainable in the short run, let alone the

long run. Overgrazing diminishes agricultural yield, and the crops cannot grow at a fast enough

rate to be able to produce such exorbitant numbers of livestock every year- there just wont be

enough food to go around and there would be an unprecedented shortage of land and food.

9

Research has shown that if an average person living 65-70 years long stops consuming

meat, he will prevent close to 100 tons of carbon dioxide from being released into the

atmosphere, such is the impact of meat production.

Environmental Impact of Slaughterhouse and Food Processing Plants

One of the major and most controversial processes involved with meat production is that

of the slaughterhouse stage. It is easy to understand why animal rights activists might protest

more vigorously at this stage due to the actual killing of the animal, however it may be a little

less clear why environmental activists also find the methods involved at this stage to be

unfavorable and outdated. To comprehend the concerns of environmentalists, it is imperative to

realize the slaughterhouses effects on three key components of the environment: water, air, and

waste.

Before an analysis of the environmental impact is presented, a description of the

slaughterhouse will be provided. Almost all the stages of this process can now be automated,

which allows the average lifetime of one slaughterhouse to be anywhere from 25-40 years.

Slaughterhouses need approximately 15,000 gallons/day of water15

to ensure the process

works smoothly (Figure 2). In stage 1 when the cow arrives to the facility their hides and skins

must be washed so it can deteriorate quicker. Then water is used in the sterilization stage. During

the actual slaughtering and evisceration, water must be used to wash the blood and organs from

the facility as well as clean the insides of the cow. Water is also used in the chilling stage to

shower the cows and use as a cooling method. Figure 3 shows a chart that represents the

percentage of water use by each category.

10

Figure 214

Figure 321

11

Although, the amount of water needed by the slaughterhouse prevents the allocation of

water to other sources with more demand, the main concern with water and slaughterhouses is

the amount of wastewater produced by each plant. Wastewater is produced from intentional

overflow from scalding tanks that contain blood, dirt, manure, and hair18

. Also during the

bleeding process large amounts of blood contaminate the water. With blood having a BOD value

ranging from 150,000-200,000 mg/l, the water contaminated with blood becomes completely

useless18

. Due to cleaning of the facility, the tissue and other organs from the cows also

contaminate the water making it highly obsolete.

These have a negative impact on the environment for several reasons. First off,

tremendous amounts of water are being wasted. In a world where demand for water is growing

and supply is decreasing, it is imperative to reduce wastage of water11

. Another reason involves

the disposing of the wastewater into the sewers. The wastewater will then emit terrible odors and

also contaminate and slow down the irrigation of cities.

Energy consumption in a slaughterhouse is mainly allocated among heating (water,

oil/natural gas), refrigeration, compressed air, lighting, machines, ventilation, and other various

sections. Operating the refrigeration demands 45-90% electric energy21

. An important concept to

consider is the fact that the refrigeration and heating system must be operating at times when the

slaughterhouse is not producing anything. This can use anywhere from 36-154 kWh/tonne

carcass21

. Other energy consumption sources and the percentage of energy they need are

provided in Figure 4.

12

Figure 4

By generating enough energy to operate the facility, many different gasses are emitted.

CO2 is produced from the smoking of the meat products, burning of gas for heating, and steam

production. SO2 is responsible for the odor that comes from hide removal and evisceration; while

NOx is produced by the sterilization process. The ranges of some emissions per ton of carcass for

one plant are provided in Figure 5. The CO2 levels, in this case, pose the greatest threat of

harming the atmosphere and causing a dangerous rise in global temperature.

Substances

Emitted

Range of Emissions per Tonne of Carcass

(kg)

CO2 22-200

SO2 0.45-1.1

NOx 0.29-0.52

Figure 5

13

Animal Waste Management Analysis

The meat industry in the United States is a major contributor to the global warming crisis.

Waste treatment is a part of the meat production process from the beginning until the end. The

animal waste while the animals are living must be treated as well as the waste produced when the

animals are slaughtered. This paper will focus on how waste management from meat production

effects global warming.

The animal production in the United States has steadily increased over the years

following the demand for the meats in the household. Meat demand and advanced technology

has allowed for this increase to happen efficiently. In 1996 the figures were as follows:

Broilers 7.6 Billion (1996)

Turkeys 300 Million (1996)

Swine 103 Million (1996)

Dairy Cows 9.2 Million (1996)

Beef Cattle 101 Million (1996)

Sheep 7.9 Million (1996)

Naturally, the increase in animal production over the years has increased the amount of

animal waste produced in meat processing.

The most common animal wastes and pollutants produced include, but are not limited to

nitrogen, phosphorus, copper, zinc, bacteria, viruses, and sediment. The following chart breaks

down the various animals and the amount of certain wastes each type of animal produces in

pounds.

14

Total Kjedahl Nitrogen (TKN) is the sum of organic nitrogen; ammonia (NH3) and

ammonium (NH4+) in the chemical analysis of soil, water, or wastewater16

. Total Phosphorous

(TP) is a nutrient essential to the growth of organisms, and is commonly the limiting factor in the

primary productivity of surface water bodies. Total phosphorus includes the amount of

phosphorus in solution (reactive) and in particle form12

. Bod5 is the Biochemical Oxygen

Demand after 5 days. Bod5 is an analytical biological method used to determine the content of

biodegradable organic material in waste water8. This chart displays some of the waste that

animals produce. The treatment of manure and the other waste from the chart above can all be

done different ways with one thing in common. Each treatment option requires the use of

machines and engines that produce carbon dioxide and release it into the atmosphere. More so,

there is a significant amount of energy used to run these machines and treat the waste. With all

this in mind it is most important to note the gases from the waste treatment of animals that affect

global warming.

The gases that contribute to the greenhouse effect most directly are carbon dioxide,

methane, nitrous oxide and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). One method of waste treatment from

Swine Dairy Horse Broiler Turkey

Weight

(lb)

135 1400 1000 2 15

Manure 4,139 43,946 18,615 37 465

Urine 1,922 13,286 3,850 - -

BOD5 153 808 621 - 11.5

TKN 26 230 110 0.8 3.4

TP 8.9 48 26 0.2 1.3

15

meat production is anaerobic waste treatment using lagoons. This waste treatment process

produces carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide. All three gases play a predominant role in

global warming. In the actual slaughterhouses where the meat is processed carbon dioxide is

also produced from some of the machines using gas engines and indirectly from the use of

electricity generated from coal power plants. The animals themselves in such large quantities

and close proximity create along with the paddy fields create a large and concentrated increase in

methane gas. The most common fertilizers used to grow the feed for the animals contain

nitrogenous fetilisers which release nitrous oxide into the atmosphere. There is without question

a direct correlation between meat production the rise in greenhouse gases and global warming.

As you can see waste treatment in the meat production process is an extensive and a very

in-depth subject. This research only begins to scratch the surface of meat production waste

treatment and its effect on global warming. However, it clear that there exists a positive

correlation between the increase in meat production and the treatment of the waste and global

warming.

Environmental and Energy Analysis of Water Treatment

It has been reported by the California Energy Commission that water treatment plants are

often the largest energy user of any government programs10

. This is because the wastewater

from food processing plants contains extraordinary high level of biochemical oxygen demand

(BOD) and suspended solids (SS) not found in residential wastewater. In particular, these high

levels of BOD and SS come from the blood and organs of the processed livestock. Generally,

BOD and SS can be treated with large quantities of high quality water, however this process is

16

inefficient and energy intensive. Air activated sludge (AAS) is one of the more common

methods used to efficiently treat wastewater.

AAS serves multiple purposes that include oxidizing and removing biological matter,

removing phosphate, and separating harmful gases such as carbon dioxide and ammonia2. The

process involves the introduction of oxygen and microorganism into wastewater that contains of

level of BOD. The goal is to provide the microorganisms, which are mainly comprised of

bacteria and protozoan, a source of energy in order to grow and form biological floc1. As the

biological floc forms, they consume the organic content of the wastewater and then precipitate

into a sludge-like substance. Once the wastewater has been sufficiently treated, it is pumped to a

settling tank where the floc precipitates to the bottom and then removed to landfills. The liquid

wastewater is then pumped to more filtration chambers where it undergoes further treatment in

order to remove any remaining microorganisms. This is often done by exposing the treated

water to a high level of ultraviolet (UV) radiation through UV lamps. The UV disinfection in

itself is a highly energy intensive process as it requires the water to be exposed to the UV

radiation for an extended amount of time.

The Treatment Process22

17

Whether the treatment method is AAS or another, the treatment process requires a large

amount of water and can be highly energy intensive. An independent research on ten water

treatment plants done by SBW Consulting Incorporated outlines the amount of water and energy

needed in the treatment of wastewater. The table below shows the ten plants involved in this

research and the processed used by each.

Water Treatment Plants Energy Usage10

Note:

RBC - rotating biological contactor. TF - Trickling Filters

AAS - air activated sludge. AAS with N/D - air activated sludge with Nitrification and Denitrification.

HPO-ASPSA - high purity oxygen activated sludge, oxygen produced by pressure swing adsorption.

HPO-AS Cryo - high purity oxygen activated sludge,oxygen produced by cryogenic process.

Though the size of each plant varies, the ten plants average 14.06 million gallon of water

per day (MGD). The average energy usage for the treatment process, per pound of BOD

removed, and per MG treated are 12907.6 kWh/d, 1.25 kWh/lb and 1231.3 kWh/MG

respectively. The total electrical usage of nine of the ten treatment plants averages 34469.67

kWh/d or 2600 kWh/MG. Considering the typical cost of $0.10 per kWh, the plants cost on

averages $3446.97 per day to treat water. This amounts to over $1.2 million a year.

18

Once the BOD and SS of the wastewater have been treated, ultraviolet radiation is then

used to disinfect the partially treated water. The process, itself, is quite simple and much more

efficient than the alternative of boiling the water. The treated water, and any bacteria present, is

exposed to a large dose of UV radiation. The radiation damages the DNA and RNA of the

bacteria which prevents it from reproducing, and thus disinfects the water10

. Simple, however,

does not always translate to energy friendly.

SBW Consulting Incorporated also did research on several plants that used UV

disinfection and found an interesting result. The average energy used to disinfect one MG of

water is 442 kWh. On a per day scale, the UV disinfection process accounted for 14% and 23%

of the total energy used of two of the plants researched10

. The table below shows the energy

used by the plants researched.

Ultraviolet Radiation Energy Usage10

Since the treatment of water requires such large amounts of electricity to operate, the

amount of indirect carbon dioxide (CO2) produced is highly significant. In the United States,

more than half of the electricity generated comes from the combustion of fossil fuel with more

than 94% of the total coal consumed in 2007 dedicated to electricity generation12

. Since 1990,

19

the increase in CO2 production has increased annually at a rate of 1.3%12

. The increase in CO2

production for electricity generation alone is about 587.5 Tg. One of the primary factor that

attribute to this growth is the overall growth in emissions from electricity generation due to

economic growth11

. The table below shows some of the primary sources of CO2.

Recent Trends of Primary Sources of CO2 Emission (Tg)

12

Since CO2 is one of the primary factors that impact the environment today, the amount

of CO2 indirectly produced in the water treatment process is a topic of high interest. If the

energy density of 6.67 kWh/kg of coal6 is considered, based on the average amount of energy of

34469.67 kWh/day for the ten treatment plants, the following is calculated:

34469.67

6.67

= 5167.87

20

5167.87 kg of coal is used daily in the operation of the treatment plants. This amount can

further be extrapolated to find the amount of CO2 produced by these plants. If the emission

factor of coal is considered, 1 kg of coal produces 2.93 kg of CO26, the following is calculated:

5167.87

2.93

2

= 15141.86

2

This can further be extrapolated to get an annual number of 5526.78 Mg CO2/year.

Considering the total electrical production produces 2397.2 Tg of CO2, a single water treatment

plant attribute 0.0002% of that CO2 production. In the state of Georgia, there are sixteen water

treatment plants17

. This means that Georgia alone is responsible for 0.0032% of the CO2

emission of water treatment.

CO2 production is not the only greenhouse gas produced during water treatment;

methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) also play a large role. Methane originates primarily

from enteric fermentation associated with domestic livestock, decomposition of wastes in

landfills, and natural gas, while nitrous oxide is emitted from agricultural soil management and

mobile source fuel combustion12

. During the water treatment process, CH4 is produced when the

microorganisms break down waste and other organic material, and N2O is produced during the

treatment process itself12

. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC),

methane is about twenty times as effective at retaining heat in the atmosphere than carbon

dioxide. Since 1990, the total amount of CH4 and N2O in the atmosphere have decreased by 31.2

Tg CO2 Eq. (5.1%) 3.1 Tg CO2 Eq. (1.0%), respectively, however the amount emitted during the

wastewater treatment process has increased by 1.7 Tg CO2 Eq (4.0%) and 1.2 Tg CO2 Eq.

(30.7%)11

. This increase in greenhouse gas during the treatment process also has a direct link to

21

the growth of the economy. The two tables below shows the trends in CH4 and N2O emission for

various sources.

CH4 Emission Trend (Tg CO2 Eq)

12.

N2O Emission Trend (Tg CO2 Eq.)

12

22

Packaging of Beef:

Packaging is a crucial part of beef when it comes to production and selling of

beef. Packaging of the beef takes place right after the slaughtering and cleaning of the beef. The

main reasons for packaging is to protect against physical changes, against chemical changes,

against microbes, and make the meat presentable to the people buying the meat(Patel .1).

Packaging is basically the final product of beef before it is transported to the consumers. This is

why packaging is so important.

Packaging of beef comes in different shapes and sizes. The packaging of the

meat has to be able accommodate for the best shipping size and keep the meat fresh till it reaches

its final destination with the consumer. The beef is stored at two point two degrees Celsius. The

beef producers like to send the beef to the marked between twenty-four to forty-eight hours. The

gas inside the refrigerator should be seventy percent carbon dioxide and the rest being nitrogen

and oxygen. Majority of the time the meats like carcasses, sides, quarters, and primal cuts need

to be delivered frozen. When the meats are frozen they either need to be bagged in paper bags

and one stocknet, completely wrap in plastic with stockinet, or completely rap the meat in plastic

or vacuum package and then box. This also adds to the energy cost because now the vehicles

that transport the meats have to freezer capabilities. If the meat is fabricated bone-in and bones-

in and boneless cuts, cuts, smoked and dried meats, and are not individually packed, then the

container needs to be lined with plastic bags. Products may be individually wrapped or layer

packed with waxed paper or plastic material that can be used for vacuuming or purposes like

this. Here are some different types of packaging casing used:

23

Film Characteristics

Cellophane (100

grades)

Cellulose acetate

LDPE derived ionomers

Metalized films

Nylon

Polybutylene

terephahalate

(PBT)

Polyester

Polyethylene HDPE,

LOPE, LLDPE

Polypropylene

Polystyrene

Polyurethane

Polyolefin

Polyvinylchloride

Polyvinylidine chloride

with PP ----- Saran

Printable, heat sealable, flexible oxygen impermeable.

O2 + Co2 permeable, oil resistant, not heat sealable used for fresh sausages.

High strength, oil resistant used for vacuum packagesHigh strength, oil

resistant used for vacuum packages

Light + gas resistant, printable ,tough, easily laminated into retort pouches O2

+ H2O impermeable, very strong.

High temperature resistance, very impermeable to O2 + H2O , easily printable

, tough.

Good heat, tear, abrasion, chemical resistance , needs adhesive to seal, O2 +

H2O impermeable . Used for retort pouches + laminates.

Oxygen permeabilty , easily sealed, moderate strength, poor grease resistance,

no heat resistance.

Stronger than PE, more heat resistant, more grease resistant

readily processed, clear, oxygen permeable , not resistant to flex.

very strong

very clear, heat stable and used as vacuum + heat shrink films.

Easily formed, easily sealed, strong, easily coated & printed.

Extremely low H2O permeable, resistant to chemicals, heat abrasion, tearing,

oil & grease frequently used as a coating.

24

Transportation of Cattle within the US and the energy associated with it

There are two main points of the entire process of production of beef where transportation plays

an imperative role:

1) The transportation of cattle from the fields to the slaughterhouses.

2) Maintain trucks for transportation

Although both parts of the transportation are important, it would be logical to stress more

importance on the transportation of cattle since maintaining live animals requires a lot more

energy. The next few pages will discuss the transportation of cattle from the fields to the

slaughterhouses in a step by step process, evaluating the energy required at every step.

Transportation of livestock:

Preconditioning

Getting the cattle ready for a rigorous trip will help them be in good condition upon arrival of

their final destination. There are three major components to preconditioning: feeding and

watering, veterinary care and stress reduction.

Feeding and watering are imperative to reduce stress levels of the animals. It is vital to transport

animals that have been on a good pre-transport diet; more importantly if the cattle are on a green

pasture or a moist area, the cattle will generally have enough water to be able to withstand the

rigorousness of transportation. It is also important to withhold feeding for cattle that are being

transported in extremely cold weather; this prevents them from soiling on each other. Also,

25

avoiding feeding cattle with succulent and a high energy diet will prevent wet manure.

However, if the cattle are being transported to the final slaughtering, it is fine if they continue on

their high energy diet.

Feeding cattle 50 to 75 percent length hay and 25 to 50 percent grain foods is vital during the 24

hours before transport. The exact percentage of hay and grain foods required for cattle depend

on the maturity of the cattle. Therefore, older cattle need less grain food and more hay so that

the cattle have normal digestion during transport. (Nyayapathi, 4)

Appropriate veterinary care must be given when cattle are being imported to a different country.

If the cattle are being moved from one state to another, then it is appropriate to check the

regulations of the state they are being imported to. Health conditions are vital for transportation

and for the ultimate slaughtering so consistently checking these conditions is a beneficial aspect

for the cattle and the consumers. (Nyayapathi, 4)

To reduce the stress that is involved in transport, it is crucial to familiarize cattle with the

surroundings they will be around during transport.

Pre-transportation diet calculations:

Average human weight: 76 kg

Average human consumes approximately: 2000 calories/day

Average weight of all cattle: 1660 kg

Therefore assuming all cattle consumes 3.5x an average human, the average cattle consumption

per day is approximately: 7000 calories/day

26

As you will see further in this paper, there are approximately 33,300,000 cattle being transported

to slaughterhouses every year.

Every day there are approximately 91233 cattle being transported to a slaughterhouse.

So, on a daily basis (assuming cows eat 8500 calories/day before transportation), for pre-

transportation diet approximately 775,480,000 calories are consumer per day.

In terms of joules, 1 calorie = 4.2 joules

So on a daily basis approximately 18,463,965 joules of food are consumed on a daily basis for

pre-transportation diet.

Preparation of Transport Vehicles

The appropriate preparation of transporting cattle will prevent them from getting sick from

disease and avoid injury to the stock that is being transported. Bedding of the vehicles,

transportation temperatures and cleaning are three parts that are important in transporting cattle.

The details of these three parts will be discussed in detail in the next few pages.

Bedding the transportation vehicles are vital for the cattle to stay in shape. Three materials will

be used for bedding in this particular scenario: sawdust, straw and sand. Sawdust is absorbent

and light. It is generally good for swine, but in our particular situation sawdust can be used to

keep up the moisture and it will help keep the cattle cool during warm months. Straw generates

heat and helps keep the cattle warm, sand serves the same purpose as well. Generally sawdust

needs to be 5 cm deep, straw 9 cm deep and sand 1 cm deep

27

Truck maintenance plays the most important role in energy usage. More importantly, many

green initiatives have been implemented in cleaning trucks due to the high amount wastes and

energy going into this aspect. (Nyayapathi 5)

Temperature is an imperative aspect for transporting cattle, especially during warm months.

Generally, the temperature is maintained via venting holes in the trucks themselves. These holes

help keep the truck ventilated.

Calculations:

Assuming average temperature needed in truck is approximately 75 degrees Celsius

Average cold weather (50

degrees Fahrenheit)

Average warm weather (80

degrees Fahrenheit)

Degrees in Celsius 10 degrees Celsius 27 degrees celsius

Average room temperature

(assuming 25 cattle per truck)

22 degrees Celsius 22 degrees Celsius

28

Cleaning trucks are vital for transportation of livestock. This will decrease their chance

of being infected and will also meet the regulations of the country or state they are being

imported into. Using hot water (generally temperature of 180 degrees Fahrenheit) is used to

clean trailers. Then the manure needs to be removed in the trucks and these wastes can be reused

as fertilizer for a green environment practice. In the calculations below we are assuming that

200 liters of water is used to clean one truck. (Nyayapathi 5)

As seen from table above, the average room temperature taken in this calculation is 22

degrees Celsius. Also, converting 180 degrees Fahrenheit to Celsius would be approximately 82

degrees Celsius.

Therefore, by taking the difference from the average temperature of water used to clean

trucks and the room temperature we get delta Celsius to be 60 degrees Celsius.

1 liter kilogram = 1 kilo cal

200 liters of water used per truck * 60 degrees delta Celsius * 1 kilocal * 4.2 Joules/ calorie

= Approximately 52 MJ of energy used to clean one truck

When packages are bulked, there is a different protocol when it comes to packing the

beef. The meat has to be frozen and stockpiled. Sometimes the meat is bulked together so it can

be further processed, and when this occurs the package is not lined with plastic. Usually the

packaging company will layer the meat with wax paper or plastic material that can easily be used

in a vacuumed environment. In special cases, like diced meat, the items should be packaged in

plastic bags or casings. When it comes to filled bags and casings, all the air pickets should be

forcefully pushed out through the open end and should be covered by metal or plastic clips,

29

tying, or folding the bag or casing completely over to cover the meat. A very common way beef

is cut and packed is in the shape of patties. When it comes to patties, they should be packed in

boxes completely lined with plastic bags. Patties that are at times individually quick frozen,

need to be packed in fiberboard boxes lined with plastic bags. As seen, there are a lot of

techniques elements that go into the physical packing of the beef.

The National Beef Packing Company has made a move to help decrease waste and

pollution by switching to reusable plastic bins. These new bins will help eliminate the use of

wood pallets and corrugate gaylords during the packaging process. Since the new Combo Bins

are reusable and recyclable, this helps the National Beef by making the packaging

environmentally sustainable. This new packaging system will also be able to sustain freight

transportation when needed. The National Beef has set up a fifteen thousand square feet service

facility where the bins can be washed and prepped again for use. The amount of use depends on

the ware and tare of the package during its transportation. This new system greatly reduces

global warming and waste when compared to past ways of transporting beef.

Another key concept of packaging is the safety portion. The safety doesnt play a big

role at first with global warming, but if the meat does get infected, it takes energy to get rid of

the certain bacteria. The National Cattlemens Beef Association has gone to great extremes to

prevent these bacterial and infections to occur. There is a code inspection that has to be passed

by meat producers called Federal Meat Inspection Act. Having these acts in place helps with

control of production of meat and the safety of the consumer. Having the quality grading system

helps in the long run of not creating waste that has to be disposed of later.

30

CONCLUSION

A Reasonable Suggestion: The Benefits of going vegetarian for two days a week

Water use:

. of beef per day

,

(297 ) (104

) (0.25

) (15,500

)

119.7 trillion litres of water used on a yearly basis for beef production

. of rice a

(297 ) (104

) (0.25 /) (3000

)

23.2 trillion litres of water used on a yearly basis for rice production

Land use

(297 ) (104

) (

0.25

) (91.25

2

) = , , , for beef production

(297 ) (104

) (

0.25

) ( 1.25

2

) = , , , for rice production

Thus, If in USA, if one eats rice in place of beef, two days a week, it would save

(119.7 23.2) = . of water (704,632,500,000

9,652,500,000)2 =

Though the environmental impact of the meat industry isnt immediately evident to the common

man, the numbers we have calculated serve as evidence of the very fact. It is surprising to know

that our eating habits can cause so much damage to the environment, and even tiny changes can

31

lead to a largely positive outcome. It is not very unreasonable to say that one could cut down on

their consumption of meat by two days a week, if not stop it completely.

Over the last half century, consumption of meat has grown enormously, as seen in the figure

below, and it is very much possible, that with the right knowledge there could be another

paradigm shift and we may see the trend reversing once again. That will be in the best interest of

individual, society, and environment.

At present times what seems to be asking for much, might not be so in the future. From every

process; ranging from fodder production, slaughtering, waste removal, storage, packaging and

transportation, the harm done to the environment is beyond justification, thus we conclude our

paper.

32

Works Cited

1. "Activated Sludge." UCLA College of Letters and Science. N.p., n.d. Web. Nov. 2010.

.

2. "Activated Sludge." Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. N.p., n.d. Web. Nov. 2010.

.

3. "Animal Waste ManagementIntroduction and BMPs." Biological and Agricultural

Engineering - North Carolina State University. N.p., n.d. Web. Nov. 2010.

.

4. "Background Statistics: U.S. Beef and Cattle Industry." USDA Economic Research

Service - Home Page. N.p., n.d. Web. Nov. 2010

.

5. "Beef Production and Greenhouse Gas Emissions." N.p., n.d. Web. Nov. 2010.

.

6. "Coal." Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Web. 04 Dec. 2010.

.

7. "Cow Question." Cow Question. N.p., n.d. Web. Nov. 2010.

.

8. "Definitions." A Healthcare Company and a World Leader in Diabetes Care. - Novo

Nordisk A/S. N.p., n.d. Web. Nov. 2010.

.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal

33

9. "Definitions." A Healthcare Company and a World Leader in Diabetes Care. - Novo

Nordisk A/S. N.p., n.d. Web. Nov. 2010.

.

10. Fok, Stephen, Kathy Benschine, Carol Harty, Jayne Ng, and Patsy Dugger. "Energy

Benchmarking Secondary Wastewater Treatment and Ultraviolet Disinfection

Processes at Various Municipal Wastewater Treatment Facilities." N.p., 28 Feb.

2002. Web. 15 Nov. 2010. .

11. "Global Water Shortage Looms In New Century." Web. Nov. 2010.

.

12. "INVENTORY OF U.S. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS AND SINKS: 1990

2007." Environmental Protection Agency, 15 Apr. 2009. Web. 3 Dec. 2010.

.

13. "MPCA Glossary." Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. N.p., n.d. Web. Nov. 2010.

.

14. "P2Rx Topic Hubs." Environmental Sustainability Resource Center. Web. 06 Dec. 2010.

.

15. Randolph Packing Co. "Reduction In Waste Load From A Meat Processing Plant-Beef."

Pg.3. < www.environmentalexpert.com/Files%5C5306%5Carticles%5C13073%5C407.pdf>.

http://www.environmentalexpert.com/Files%5C5306%5Carticles%25

34

16. "Recommendations for the Care and Handling of Beef Cattle." N.p., n.d. Web. Nov.

2010. .

17. Sewage World: USA Directory. Web. Dec. 2010.

18. "SLAUGHTERHOUSES." FAO: FAO Home. Web. 06 Dec. 2010.

.

19. THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THE ANIMAL PRODUCT PROCESSING

INDUSTRIES." Web. Nov. 2010.

.

20. "Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen." Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. N.p., n.d. Web. Nov. 2010.

.

21. Upload and Share PowerPoint Presentations Online - SlideServe. N.p., n.d. Web. Nov.

2010. .

22. "U.S. Water Treatment." Center of Sustainable Systems. University of Michigan. Web.

Dec. 2010. .

23. "What Is Activated Sludge?" Automation in Microbiology and Biosciences. N.p., n.d.

Web. Nov. 2010.

.

http://www.sewage.net/#GAhttp://www.fao.org/wairdocs/LEAD/X6114E/x6114e03.htmhttp://css.snre.umich.edu/css_doc/CSS04-14.pdf