Hamburger with a Vast Side of Water
Who’s the real culprit of California’s drought? Your shower or your hamburger patty?
In January of 2014, California State Governor, Jerry Brown, issued a drought state of emergency following the state’s driest documented year in history. In his statement, Governor Brown asked Californians to do their part by cutting their water consumption twenty percent. Cutting water back seemed like an easy enough task at first with all the water saving tips and tricks made available by the Association of California Water Agencies and the California Department of Water Resources (who sponsored some of California’s major water conservation campaigns such as saveourh20.org) and the upcoming year we did our part limiting time spent in the shower, turning the faucet off when not in use, and watering our lawns only in the morning or simply switching them out for more climate appropriate landscaping. We spent some much time applauding ourselves for the water we saved inside and outside our home ,but what about the 660 gallons of water hiding inside packaging in our fridge?
When biting into that juicy In and Out Double-Double, you probably weren’t aware that your order automatically came with a supersized drink — around 660 gallons of water for that quarter pound of meat between your burger buns. Or how about that pound of chicken breast you just laid on grill? — another 500 gallons and don’t get me started on your pulled pork sandwich. The reason we aren’t worried about the amount of water being used to produce our meat is that unlike the water used on our lawn,we don’t see the water being used.
But just because we don’t see this water being used doesn’t mean it’s not.
What most people don’t realize is although cutting back your water consumption twenty percent by monitoring your usage of it inside and outside your home, when buying beef at the store or placing chicken on your dinner table you’re purchasing and serving up to a few thousand gallons of water. We do this because the meat consumption of our water footprint goes by unnoticed, though alone, it accounts for nearly thirty percent of the United State’s water.
If your meat package had a label stating “660 gallons of water per quarter pound of meat,” would you think twice about purchasing it, especially in this drought?
Think about it, by not purchasing that beef you’re well exceeding your twenty percent conservation of the 80–100 gallons the average person uses per day.
The 660 gallons of water per quarter pound of beef is not tallying up the gallons of water in your beef (of course not, the package label says pounds of meat not gallons of water) ,but the water that goes into producing it. Water is needed for the animals to drink, to grow the crops or water the fields in which they consume, maintain the housing they live in, and clean the animals throughout the process in which they are turned into meat, packaged, and shipped to stores. That 660 gallons seems like a such a small number now when you multiply it by pounds per cow, cow per farm, and number of cows consumed by humans per day. Do that math with any other animal consumed as meat and the numbers are just as astounding (keeping in mind the amount of gallons that ostensibly aren’t accounted for).
Now take that 660 gallons and put it side by side with the average 15 gallons from your faucet, 3 gallons from your toilet, 30 gallons from your washing machine, and 25 gallons for your shower a person potentially uses each day (not to mention the water from various other sources) times the number of people in your household. Or I’ll spare you the calculations since animal agriculture beats out domestic water use fifty five percent to five percent in water consumption. Beginning to rethink your hamburger just yet?
With meat consumption playing such a large role in California’s drought, why aren’t officials or water conservation organization telling people to cut down on meat?
To put it simply, it’s much easier to convince people to shorten their showers than change their diets. It’s also much easier to access information on the water coming from your leaky faucet than it is to find out how much water the farm or factory used when producing your Big Mac patty. I hate to admit that while I don’t see a drastic cut of meat consumption anytime soon in regards to water conservation, I do foresee a future with people beginning to rethink and question their meat (especially with all the buzz around new plant based meat alternatives). And though you should still applaud yourself for cutting your precious shower time down to three minutes, why not celebrate water conservation on a larger scale (660 gallons worth to be exact) by foregoing that burger on your ride home from work?
M. Rose Swanson
