Chamanara combed through satellite imagery of every county in the contiguous U.S. to confirm the location of more than 15,000 AFOs. About a quarter of these were found in just 30 counties. Knowing where the AFOs were, the researchers could then integrate other available data from those locations to draw further conclusions.
For example, they found that levels of air pollution made up of particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size—also called PM2.5—were higher near AFOs. They also found that AFOs were often located closer to communities with lower levels of education and health insurance coverage.
“One of the things this study reveals is that we could focus on a limited number of counties to really address health impacts in these communities,” says Newell. “If you’re a policymaker, a government, or a community group or association concerned with these issues, this allows you to develop very targeted policies or measures. That’s one of the reasons why mapping this out spatially is so important.”
Carbon Hoofprints
Determining and mapping the carbon hoofprints of cities across the country also revealed some eye-popping stats, as well as opportunities to chart a path to a more sustainable future.
For example, the carbon footprint of U.S. cities is larger than all carbon emissions from the United Kingdom. But Americans can make relatively straightforward changes to help minimize their impact, such as substituting chicken for beef, reducing food waste and participating in Meatless Mondays.
To quantify these impacts and opportunities, the U-M team collaborated with University of Minnesota researchers led by Rylie Pelton and Jennifer Schmitt, who are on the team that developed a model called Food System Supply-Chain Sustainability, or FoodS3, to dig into meat’s supply chains in the U.S. This provided a more comprehensive accounting of greenhouse gas emissions from what it takes to produce beef, chicken and pork—from growing the feed for animals, to managing the manure at ranches and AFOs to shipping the processed meat to cities.
“This is something that has been largely missing,” says Goldstein. “We know that cities use these supply chains that span thousands of miles to get their resources and support their daily consumption. But we have lacked an analytical architecture to actually capture that consumption and link it to environmental changes at different locations until now.”
And the carbon hoofprint was just the first step. The team said the model can now be easily adapted for other commodities, both agricultural and otherwise, that cities depend on.
This work was funded, in part, by the U.S. National Science Foundation.
What's the carbon hoofprint of your city?