Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
I want to know if everyone in CA stop eating meat, how much would that cut our water use?
California is in extreme drought conditions. To feed and clean chickens, cows and hogs accounts for much of the water used in CA agriculture, so if we stop meat production until this drought is over would save more then the 20% gov. Brown is calling for. But I know that would never happen.
9 Answers
- ?Lv 77 years agoFavorite Answer
If we got rid of all those living here illegally how much water could we save here in California? Why should I stop eating meat to "save water" when there are other BETTER options available to us.
Another viable option if for City folks to stop wasting valuable water on unnecessary decorative gardens and swimming pools. Let their lawns go brown and empty those pools. Or better yet leave California.
- Anonymous7 years ago
Feeding cattle is the major issue. A huge percentage of California water is used to produce hay and alfalfa, and to provide pasturage for cattle. However, most California beef production is sent elsewhere for slaughter and distribution, so California production might not decrease significantly should Californians eschew beef. Moreover, the biggest marketer of beef BY FAR is McDonald's, and that beef comes from Lopez Foods in Oklahoma and Tennessee. So if Californians stopped going to McDonald's (which might be a good idea for many other reasons) that would probably affect production only in the Southern states which supply Lopez Foods, not reducing California water use.
And, beyond that, you are right--it would never happen.
- BflowingLv 77 years ago
We would do what with the animals? Also, what will we do with the hay and other type of crops already being grown? Idealistic, but not very practical.
By the way, the water saved would probably just be used for people's lawns.
- tonalc2Lv 77 years ago
I think you're asking if we stopped beef production. (If we stopped eating it, everyone else would continue.)
It takes anywhere from 2,500 to 4,000 gallons of water to produce one pound of meat. (For reference, 5,000 gallons would be enough water to shower every day for a year.)
Beef is the most water-intensive meat. The average consumption of beef is 47 pounds per year, or 140,000 gallons per person. Let's say that there are lots of vegetarians in California, so only about 30 million people eat beef. That's about 4 trillion gallons per year.
fun fact: Beef cattle are raised in every county in California except for San Francisco.
Source(s): http://www.earthsave.org/environment/water.htm http://www.meatami.com/ht/a/GetDocumentAction/i/48... http://vegetarian.procon.org/view.resource.php?res... http://www.cfaitc.org/factsheets/pdf/Beef.pdf - How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- Anonymous7 years ago
None at all.
It'd just lower the cost of meat and likely lead to more exports. meat production isn't something you can turn on and off on a minute's notice.
- Anonymous7 years ago
very confusing task look with a search engine that will help
- 7 years ago
Has Brown been abducted by aliens recently? Or is that all in his past?
- Anonymous7 years ago
No