1300 gallons for one burger?

[Raine Pellerin]

The world is rapidly decreasing the amount of useable water. One thing that isn’t helping with this situation is raising cattle. It has been a known issue since at least 1980. According to a California study from about thirty years ago it takes thirteen hundred gallons of water to produce one hamburger. The water is used to feed and water the cattle and then process the meat afterwards. This was found to be a lot more water than most other foods. This means that we need to start using more alternatives to beef because beef takes so much water to make. A lot of people might not like the idea of an alternative to beef but they’ll prefer the idea if it means more water. Not eating meat at all would give us a lot more water. We can easily get our protein from other sources. What do you choose, beef or water?

[Adam Awada]

If we were to decrease the amount water is being used surely, I doubt that water pollution would go down. I believe it would increase, most likely companies would start mass production, unlike for some companies where try atleast attempt to meet a quota which at times they do surpass. For them, they don't care about the environment, they'd destroy the whole world if they could if they could have all the money in the world. But as more water issues increase, less care companies will care about and continue mass production. This much water shouldn't be used for 1 hamburger it's pure insanity and waste of such a precious resource. They don't care, it's all about finance now a days.

[Raine Pellerin]

I wasn't saying that the companies would care. I was saying that the people who want their children, and their children's children, and so on, to have at least a little water in their life time. If the people who are buying beef, stop buying beef and replace their resources of protein with something else, then the companies will run out of money and not be able to afford to make the burgers. What 1300 gallons of water for one burger means is the water is used to water and grow the food for the cattle.

If we were to use less water, why would water pollution increase? I disagree with you, you said. “If we were to decrease the amount water is being used surely, I doubt that water pollution would go down.” Water pollution would definitely go down, plus if the companies didn’t make the beef, imagine how much more water we would have. There’s about 17 million gallons of water a day being used, if not more, just for beef.

[RebeccaHall]

Reducing the amount of water put into cattle reproduction system may save water, but no one will ever work that hard to conserve water, yes we need water more than food, but we do need meat (protein). Myself I am against cattle farms for many reasons but that’s not my point. I think it’s a good idea, but it will never happen, sadly. I also agree with Adam, companies like tofu producers would ramp up production, causing that much more water use and pollution. No matter how hard we try it will never be a concern to all people. People who have the money for home filtration systems will never care about what they’re putting into the water.
Yes, I agree with Raine, it uses a lot of water and pollutes a lot of water. But you will never get government to make regulations cutting down the amount of water used in the cattle process. In my opinion, the government will never care … About the people drinking the contaminated water or the people in foreign countries, drinking sewage water. What will it take is my question.

[Sponsored content]