Cited by 466Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental ImpactEnvironmental Impact and SustainabilitySustainable Agricultural Systems Analysis

Land, irrigation water, greenhouse gas, and reactive nitrogen burdens of meat, eggs, and dairy production in the United States

Open access
Eshel, Gidon, Shepon, Alon, Makov, Tamar, Milo, Ron·2014·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Significance: Livestock-based food production is an important and pervasive way humans impact the environment. It causes about one-fifth of global greenhouse gas emissions, and is the key land user and source of water pollution by nutrient overabundance. It also competes with biodiversity, and promotes species extinctions. Empowering consumers to make choices that mitigate some of these impacts through devising and disseminating numerically sound information is thus a key socioenvironmental priority. Unfortunately, currently available knowledge is incomplete and hampered by reliance on divergent methodologies that afford no general comparison of relative impacts of animal-based products. To overcome these hurdles, we introduce a methodology that facilitates such a comparison. We show that minimizing beef consumption mitigates the environmental costs of diet most effectively.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.1402183111

Cites

69 of 69 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In the USA, combined feed consumption by broiler and egg-laying chickens is 58 Mt of dry concentrates per year, the greatest feed volume of any farmed animal group.

    “In the USA the combined feed consumption by broiler and egg-laying chickens has been calculated as 58 Mt (×109 kg) of dry concentrates (grains and by-products) per year; the greatest feed volume of any farmed animal group [62].”
  • The land area required to produce feed for chickens is lower than for pigs and cattle.

    “Overall, the land area required to produce feed for chickens is lower than for pigs and cattle, who consume processed roughage and pasture, which increases the overall land-use burden [62,63].”
  • The land area and reactive nitrogen emitted from the production of chicken feed is more than double that used to grow plant crop staples (rice, wheat and potatoes).

    “Nevertheless, the land area and reactive nitrogen emitted (from fertilizers) from the production of chicken feed is significantly higher (more than double) that used to grow plant crop staples (rice, wheat and potatoes) [62].”
  • Producing animal-sourced foods, especially beef, imposes burdens on land, irrigation water, greenhouse gas emissions, and reactive nitrogen.

    “Past investigators have highlighted the land, irrigation water, greenhouse gas, and reactive nitrogen burdens of producing animal-sourced foods, especially beef.[44, 45]”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Kucharik CJ (2003) Evaluation of a process-based agro-ecosystem model (Agro-IBIS) across the U.S. Corn Belt: Simulations of the interannual variability in maize yield. Earth Interact 7(14):1-33.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Eshel, G., Shepon, A., Makov, T., & Milo, R.
Affiliations
  • Bard College (US)
  • Weizmann Institute of Science (IL)
  • Yale University (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2014-07-21
Volume
111
Issue
33
Pages
11996-12001
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W1998990180
Cited by
466
References
69
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 39 · 2022: 42 · 2021: 42 · 2020: 52 · 2019: 46 · 2018: 49 · 2017: 39 · 2016: 33 · 2015: 46 · 2014: 7
FWCI
36.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust
  • FP7 Ideas: European Research Council (260392)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Environmental Impact and Sustainability
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Sustainable Agricultural Systems Analysis
Keywords
beef production, environmental impact of livestock, land use, irrigation water, reactive nitrogen, greenhouse gas emissions, life cycle assessment, dairy products, poultry, pork, eggs, dietary change, resource efficiency, plant-based diet, American diet
MeSH terms
Animals, Dairying, Eggs, Gases, Meat, Nitrogen, Greenhouse Effect, Agricultural Irrigation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review