How does the section “Beyond greenhouse gases” contribute to the development of ideas in the text (Paragraphs 17-23)? Use details from the text to support your answer.
(here is the text)
“I think it’s interesting,” Danielle Nierenberg said of the new study. She’s president of Food Tank, a
food-policy organization based in Washington, D. C. Looking at greenhouse gases is important, she
says. But, she adds, it’s just one of many environmental costs of foods.
“The more we think about what we’re eating, and food’s role in sustainability8

or in climate change,
that’s a good thing,” she says. But, she adds, “more needs to be done to be sure that we’re capturing
everything.” By that she means scientists want to be sure that they are not missing important
environmental “costs” of producing food.
Those costs may have to do with the resources. Some crops are water hogs, which can be a problem in
areas with little rain. Others may require a lot of processing — using water and plenty of expensive
energy — to clean, cook-up, package or deliver foods to grocery shoppers.
And then there are a range of less visible environmental problems. Animals may harden the soils,
making the land less likely to soak up water when it rains. Often farmers rely on weed killers and pest
killers to improve the size of their crop harvests. Many of those chemicals can be toxic to wildlife and
people. Some fertilizers can pollute groundwater.

Plowing fields can lead to erosion. That can

diminish the fertility of soils.
Finally, Nierenberg notes, even for meat, “not all meat is created equal.” Some farmers pen cattle in
feedlots to fatten them quickly. This requires feeding them an unnatural diet and releases a lot of
animal wastes (poop and pee) into a small area. In contrast, some farmers graze11 their cattle on
pastures. Allowing the animals to eat grass and over a broad expanse of land helps ensure that the soil
is protected and that native plants are not trampled to death.