11 July 2013
In Lisa Hamilton’s “Unconventional Farmers; Let Them Eat Meat”, she justifies the issue of raising livestock for food causing greenhouse gas emissions. Should we be eating less meat or actually eating more? Hamilton’s research found many interesting points that would interest any human beings that consume meat or any other type of consumable goods.
In her essay, Hamilton begins with the statistic that “eighteen percent of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions come from livestock”. The idea to eat less meat was established by Dr. Rakendra Pachauri. Hamilton disagreed and believed that humans should be eating more of a different kind of meat. In her research, she found that the livestock could actually service the farmers with less work by improving the soil in a natural way. Jason Mann, another farmer who also believed the livestock could have a few advantages, viewed the issue as if it were a bank account. Bank accounts allow someone to withdraw money that they place into it. Thinking in a way of a farmer, Mann saw that when he harvested a crop, he took away nutrients from the soil. In order to deposit more nutrients for the next harvest season, he would need the nutrients from livestock manure and also use them as a natural plowing machine using their hoofs to help break up the old soil. Like the weather, the seasons change. Some seasons may produce an abundance of products to sell, but then others might produce little to done caused by droughts, lack of attention, or pesticides. Raising livestock for food acts as a back up plan. Selling the meat will allow money to still be made to keep the bank account from over drafting. Hamilton finds that it may be easier to keep the meat and vegetation at an equal level to keep the greenhouse gasses equal instead of constant rising.
Lisa Hamilton used the five elements of rhetorical situation to make this essay simpler to understand the issue of the greenhouse...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document