Switch to: Proximity to Environmentally Sensitive Protected Areas
EPA Required Reporting Facilities and Environmental Impact
By: Marriele Robinson
Project Overview and Context
In the United States, 8,000 of the largest industry greenhouse gas emitters are required to the Environmental Protection Agencies (EPA) Greenhouse Gas Reporting System. Total reported emissions from these 8,000 facilities are about 3 billion metric tons CO2e, or 50 percent of total U.S. GHG emissions (EPA, 2017). Beyond dispropotionately contributing the total greenhouse gas emissions, these facilities have few retrictions as to location. The result is high emitting factories placed inside or near to protected wildlife reserves. These areas will be especially sensitive to the contaminated water runoff commonplace with high emitting facilities, resulting in loss of ecosystems.
This Project explores the implications of the facilities required to report to the EPA by depicting total greenhouse gas emissions and their proximity to both natural bodies of water and protected habitats. Emphasis is placed on industrial agriculture for greenhouse gas emissions (Map 1) and facility location in repsect to protected wildlife areas (Map 2).
Methodology
Much of my project was done directly in Brackets, rather than CARTOdb. CARTOdb was used for Analysis. Utilizing data from the EPA and state Natural Resources Departments, 'nearest distance' analysis was used to crop total facility data to only those in closest proximity to natural bodies of water and protected areas. Beyond analyiss, Brackets allowed for more control in styling and final-site user friendliness.
The maps are on the same site, but are linked to separate pages within that site, to ensure that the page doesn't get crowded. While the first map has significant click options and pop-ups, the second was meant to be more bare to emphasize only location proximity to protected land. The result are different, but complimentary maps.
The Impact of Factory Farming Facilities on Air, Water, and Sensitive Ecosystems
Use the radio buttons, check boxes, and drop-down menu to navigate industrial farming industry facilities. Click the points to review facility name and greenhouse gas emissions for 2015 and 211.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Proximity to Rivers and Lakes
The “Facilities Greenhouse Gas Emissions Map” depicts all factory farming facilities affiliated with animal processing, with the option to toggle to Cargill only facilities. Globally, up to 29% of GHG emissions are from the agriculture sector (Global Justice Now, 2015). In the United States, the top four beef producers are responsible for over 70 percent of the domestic beef market (Painter, 2017). With power concentrated to a few powerful and influential corporations, little progress has been achieved in modernizing the industrial farming industry. In fact, practices remain almost unchanged from their initial development almost a century ago. The result is a polluting and exploitative industry that is harming the surrounding water, air, and ecosystems.
Facilities are also mapped based on nearest proximity to a natural body of water. The agriculture industry is the leading cause of water quality problems today (EPA, 2016). Fertilizers and manure resulting from livestock farming are the leading sources of water pollution from agricultural sources (The Sources and Solution: Agriculture, 2017).
The Center for Disease Control reported that between 1986-1998 every identified waterborne disease was likely from livestock-related water contaminates (Grace Projects, 2017). With many facilities on or near the water, combined with the fact that 2,500 cows producing as much waste as 411,000 residents (Cargill has over 115,000 cows PER feedlot), these statistics are unsurprisingly. (Grace Projects, 2017).
While the EPA mandates Livestock Manure Management Systems and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permits, regulations haven’t fixed the water runoff problem. Better management of livestock waste and drainage water would significantly reduce water runoff pollution. For example, moving cattle from industrial feed operations to field grazing reduces the presence of E. Coli (Grace Projects, 2017). Additionally, facilities that adopt renewable energy systems for waste disposal, rather than in-ground containment tanks, would greatly reduce septic leaks. However, renewable energy systems are as accepted by the EPA as in-ground tanks are, making the investment largely unnecessary in the eyes of industry leaders, and adoption remains limited.
Cargill
Cargill facilities are included as a separate filter on this map due to their status. Of the top three livestock producers, Cargill is the highest emitter of GHG, declaring over 15 million tons of CO2 emissions a year (Global Justice Now, 2015). In the United States, Cargill, along with 8,000 of the largest industry emitters, is required to report seven of its facilities GHG emission data to the Environmental Protection Agencies (EPA) Greenhouse Gas Reporting System. If Cargill was held responsible for poor waste management and water runoff issues, their changes in technologies and management process and procedures would result in an entire industry trend towards more sustainable practices.
Sources
Data
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources: Protected Waterfowl Production
California Department of Natural Resources: Protected Spawning Areas."
Information
‘Learn About the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP).’ The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). February 2017. https://www.epa.gov/ghgreporting/learn-about-greenhouse-gas-reporting-program-ghgrp Accessed 29 April 2017
Global Justice Now. ‘Silent but Deadly - Estimating the real climate impact of agribusiness corporations.’ December 2015.
Painter, Kristen Leigh. ‘Cargill is selling two cattle feedlots, exiting that portion of the beef industry.’ Star Tribune. 26 April 2017.
‘The Sources and Solution: Agriculture.’ The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 10 March 2017.
‘Waste Management’. Grace Projects. 2017.
About the Author
Marriele E. Robinson is a graduate student in Environmental Policy and Sustainability Management at the Milano School of International Affairs, Management, and Urban Policy at The New School.