Environmental Pollution From Sustainable and Conventional Agriculture:

A Comparative Analysis

Madison Post

ENVL 3241

Professor Chirenje

Stockton University
 Sustainability is and will continue to be a vital aspect to the success and well-being of
today’s society and environment as well as the future’s. The concept of something being
sustainable means it can be maintained at a reasonable rate without substantial depletion or harm
to the ecological balance on earth. The term is now becoming more well-known and supported as
we face the threats of climate change inflicted by the use of natural, finite resources, inefficient
technologies, and the emittance of immense pollution. One of the largest ongoing challenges in
accomplishing the concept of sustainability in the United States is the copious production of
pollution in nearly every sector of the economy. In the United States, agriculture and its directly
related industries make up over 10 percent of total employment (USDA, 2022). This industry
plays a critical role in providing food and nutrition, economic stability, fabrics, and shelter all
around the world. Globally, approximately 50 percent of total habitable land is used for
agriculture; in the United States, about 40 percent of land is occupied by agricultural practices
(Water Resources, 2019). For such a crucial and dominating business, though, we as a society are
not being efficient, health-conscious, or sustainable enough with our methods of execution.
Conventional agricultural practices are responsible for immense pollution to the environment
through air, water, and soil contamination. This paper will evaluate the true impacts traditional
agriculture within the U.S. has on the environment in comparison to sustainable agriculture.
The Agricultural Revolution and the practices set forth by it were the beginning stages of
mass pollution to our most valuable assets as a growing population: the land. Before the
advancement of technology and the consideration of possible risks to the soil and overall
environment were enacted into law, the style of farming in the early 1900s was nearly completely
destructive. Tractors and harvester-combines were modern equipment at the time, and the
majority of farms throughout the Midwest depended on these machines to till and plow the soil
in order to increase crop productivity (Water Resources, 2019). Tilling – the mechanical process
of soil agitation – was typically used in efforts to prepare seedbeds, suppress weed growth, and
incorporate fertilizer and pesticides into the root zone. However, the negative impacts tillage
made on the soil quality such as disrupting soil structure, heightening surface runoff, and soil
erosion became more apparent than the positive outcomes, and ultimately resulted in the Dust
Bowl, one of the worst environmental disasters in U.S. history (Borowski, 2012).
The Dust Bowl along with the economic depression of the 1930s is considered to be the
turning point in which the federal government began to intervene with measures such as
subsidies and forms of “conservation” practices to prevent such a disaster from happening ever
again (Davidson, 2002). Although these practices were aimed to help conserve and protect the
natural and human environment at the time, however, some of these implementations,
“particularly land drainage, have seriously damaged the natural hydrologic environment,” and
have also not improved much at all since their initial declarations in comparison to the abundant
improvements made in science and technology since the 1930s (Davidson, 2002). The other
practices such as terracing, land retirement, and improved forage crops were indeed deemed
beneficial towards their original goals, but still do not suffice for the overall pollution and
damage to soil health these traditional practices continue to invoke; or outweigh the benefits that
come along with sustainable farming for that matter. While agricultural pollution has many
different sources, these specific farming practices gave cause to the overwhelming depletion of
all valuable nutrients within the soil.
Still, there is a heavy reliance within agricultural practices on fertilizers, pesticides, and
animal manure to keep crop production and profitability maximized, with minimal consideration
of the environmental effects of the use of these chemicals. In 2010, “about 11 billion kilograms
of nitrogen fertilizers and 300 million kilograms of pesticides were used annually to enhance
crop production or control pests” (Water Resources, 2019). The application of chemical
fertilizers and animal manure do provide crops with nitrogen and phosphorus, compounds
necessary for crop growth and production. However, excess application of these chemicals
results in nitrogen and phosphorus running off into waterways, leaching into groundwater, and
evaporating into the air as nitrogen- or phosphorus-based compounds (EPA, 2022). The most
important and damaging chemicals emitted through conventional agriculture in the U.S. are
ammonia – “where agriculture accounts for ~90% of total emissions,” – sulfur oxides, particulate
matter (PM), methane, nitrous oxide, carbon dioxide, and odorous or pathogenic emissions
(Aneja, 2009). All of these products from agriculture pose substantial environmental and human
health risks.
Ammonia, mainly sourced from the application of fertilizers and manure, is a colorless
gas released when organic matter is broken down. In the atmosphere, ammonia can bind to other
gasses to form ammonium nitrate, which can cause significant health risks on the cardiovascular
and respiratory systems. Environmental risks of ammonia can include direct negative impact on
biodiversity, aquatic ecosystems, forests, and vegetation through increased acid and nitrogen
depositions (Guthrie et al., 2018). Ammonia can also enhance particulate matter (PM)
concentrations, which are a combination of both solid and liquid microscopic particles, organic
and/or inorganic, that are suspended in air and so small they can be inhaled. PM can cause
significant health effects to your lungs, heart, and respiratory system as well as environmental
effects such as water acidification, nutrient depletion in soils, damage to sensitive ecosystems,
and nutrient imbalances in waterways (EPA, 2022). The emittance of sulfur oxides, a group of
gaseous chemicals emitted by the burning of fossil fuels, can be attributed to conventional
agriculture through the consumption of fossil fuels for fertilizer production and farm operations.
Sulfur oxides can create secondary pollutants such as PM as well as directly damage trees and
vegetation, inhibit plant or crop growth, and damage ecosystems and waterways (MN PCA,
2022). Methane, a highly hazardous air pollutant and potent greenhouse gas, is a main
contributor to air pollution and global warming; and about 37% of anthropogenic methane
emissions come from the global livestock sector of agricultural practices (Aneja, 2009).
Although agriculture is producing crops that sequester carbon dioxide through photosynthesis,
the burning of fossil fuels for farm operations and the depletion of soil health for optimal
sequestration still result in large emissions of CO2 as well. The immense amount of air, water,
and soil quality degradation caused as a result from the release of these pollutants from
conventional agriculture concludes that these current practices are no longer efficient or feasible
for the future health of humanity and the planet.
Science and technology today show that the health of the land and soil in which crops are
grown is not only a crucial factor to the success of crop growth, but to the amount of emissions
and outputs released into the environment as well. A study performed in northern California
recorded the crop yields and weeds in organic, low-input, and conventional farming systems to
determine a difference in the success of crop growth and soil health between varying scales of
sustainable agricultural practices. The results revealed no significant difference in crop yields
among the differing farming systems over a five-year period. These results then conclude that
both “organic (no synthetic fertilizer or pesticide use), and low-input (reduced amount of
synthetic fertilizer and pesticide use) farming systems” provide lower to no risk of nitrogen
leaching or mineralization, leading to improved “agricultural sustainability and environmental
quality while maintaining similar crop yields” (Poudel et al., 2002).
 Another study compared alternative farming practices such as organic management,
species biodiversity, and/or reduced inputs of synthetic fertilizer and pesticides to conventional
farming practices to examine the effects of both on subsurface drainage and water quality. The
results indicated a 41% reduction in subsurface drainage discharge from alternative farming
compared to conventional farming. This led to much less nitrate loss within the concentrated soil
of alternative farming practices and very low detections of ammonium-nitrogen and
orthophosphorus within subsurface drainage. The conclusion of this study suggested that
“alternative farming practices have the potential to reduce agricultural impacts on water quality”
(Oquist et al., 2007). The results of both studies show significant favor to the implementation of
sustainable agricultural practices across the U.S. by providing direct evidence of the positive
impact and reduction in pollution emissions these practices can provide while still maintaining
agricultural demand.
Various methods of sustainable agriculture such as crop rotation, cover crops, waste
management, polyculture farming, Integrated Pest Management (IPM), and carbon sequestration
could lead agriculture into being the most economically successful, natural and efficient industry
it has ever been. The current most damaging component to traditional agriculture is the abundant
use of pesticides and chemical fertilizers on crops. These pesticides and chemicals cause serious
pollution and degradation of proper nutrients in the soil; but if sustainable practices were
implemented such as allowing natural pest predators to control pest outbreaks and bio-intensive
Integrated Pest Management (IPM) to monitor and enforce effective solutions that limit pest
problems, the need for pesticides becomes obsolete (UCS, 2022). Crop rotation is also an
effective, sustainable technique to avoid the use of fertilizers and the consequential depletion of
soil nutrients from planting the same crops in the same soil for multiple seasons in a row. This
method instead replenishes the soil with necessary nutrients and improves pest control, keeping
the soil viable and production profitable for much longer (UCS, 2022).
When certain crops are out of season, using cover crops such as clover, rye, or grasses
also help to prevent soil erosion and weed growth on soil plots that would have otherwise
remained bare. Polyculture farming, similar to crop rotation, is the process of planting multiple
crop species on one plot to maximize the use of available resources. This technique results in
high biodiversity to help with soil fertility, resilience to harsh weather, and improved overall crop
yields. Advancing in waste management technology can help tremendously in replenishing soil
nutrients and creating more robust, increased crop yields as well. Waste management can range
from leaving crop residue in the field after harvests to composting animal waste and plant
material. Finally, carbon sequestration proves to be one of the most promising methods to restore
life and nutrients into degraded soil through sustainable agriculture. An enhanced method of
carbon sequestration can generate an optimal crop production while simultaneously retracting an
optimal amount of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. The billions of microorganisms found
within healthy soil feed off the carbon that is released from the roots of plants, and through this
process is how plants then obtain mineral nutrients to continue to grow. “Carbon stored in soil is
2-4 times higher than that stored in the atmosphere,” therefore this process is extremely
beneficial for storing carbon emissions and combating climate change (Hussain, 2021). With this
large variety of sustainable agricultural practices and the immediate mitigation to air, water, and
soil pollutants they provide, it is evident how truly beneficial sustainable, alternative farming is
in comparison to conventional farming.
One of the large challenges or setbacks against the transition to sustainable agriculture,
however, is made apparent by Douglas Constance (2010). A literature review by Constance
analyzes the attempts from private industrial agribusinesses to develop a national sustainable
agriculture standard in the U.S. that could be twisted and used to their advantage. While the
concept of sustainability concerns the environment, economy, and society as equally
interconnected, the economic consequences to situations are often prioritized over the remaining
two factors in today’s world of governance. Constance’s research analyzed the effects this
structure had on industrial agriculture and their willingness to embrace sustainable practices. In
result, “the case of the contested development of sustainable agriculture standards in the U.S.
[provided] pertinent examples of how [GMO transnational corporations] use power to shape the
system of agrifood governance in general, and sustainability in particular,” leaving little room for
promising environmental improvement on the end of these corporations (Constance, 2010).
Primarily, the economic impact industrial agriculture has is the driving factor as to why larger
agriculture corporations add friction to the acceptance of these new, improved, logical, and
environmentally sound practices. This is overall a practical and necessary factor to consider in
order to properly implement policy changes to aid in the transition towards sustainable practices.
Implementing change to one of the largest contributors to greenhouse gas emissions and
environmental harm, the agriculture industry, has been deemed top of the list for viable options
towards combating the effects of climate change. It is admissible to say that the technology and
research the U.S. had in the early 1900s was a fraction of the advancements available today. The
consequences of pollution and degraded environmental quality from these initial agricultural
practices for mass production were unforeseen and could ultimately be excusable. However, it is
the lack of adaptation and recognition to our now immensely advanced knowledge that is
inexcusable. The research and technology available throughout all sources of media reveal
undeniable benefits towards sustainability, of which are genuinely in need of pursuit in order to
have a fighting chance against the human health and environmental risks impending from
pollution and climate change. Overall, the comparison between conventional agriculture and
sustainable, alternative agriculture systems show immensely more beneficial impacts from
sustainable agricultural practices than traditional practices; and in order to obtain these beneficial
impacts these systems must be implemented across the U.S. at a faster rate.
 References
Aneja, V. P., Schlesinger, W. H., Erisman, J. W. (2009). Effects of Agriculture upon the Air
Quality and Climate: Research, Policy, and Regulations. Environmental Science &
Technology. 43 (12), 4234-4240. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/es8024403
Borowski, S. (2012). The Dust Bowl: A wake-up call in environmental practices. American
Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS).
https://www.aaas.org/dust-bowl-wake-call-environmental-practices
Constance, D.H. (2010). Sustainable Agriculture in the United States: A Critical Examination of
a Contested Process. Sustainability. 2(1), 48-72. https://doi.org/10.3390/su2010048
Davidson, J. H. (2002). Sustainable development and agriculture in the United States. ELR News
& Analysis. 32(5), 10543.
https://www.proquest.com/docview/14612318?accountid=29054
EPA. (2022). Health and Environmental Effects of Particulate Matter (PM). EPA: Particulate
Matter (PM) Pollution. https://www.epa.gov/pm-pollution/health-and-environmental-
effects-particulate-matter-pm
EPA. (2022). The Sources and Solutions: Agriculture. EPA: Nutrient Pollution.
https://www.epa.gov/nutrientpollution/sources-and-solutions-agriculture
Guthrie, S., Giles, S., Dunkerley, F., Tabaqchali, H., Harshfield, A., Ioppolo, B., Manville, C.
(2018). Impact of ammonia emissions from agriculture on biodiversity: An evidence
synthesis. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation. https://doi.org/10.7249/RR2695
Hussain, S., Hussain, S., Guo, R., Sarwar, M., Ren, X., Krstic, D., … El-Esawi, M. (2021).
Carbon Sequestration to Avoid Soil Degradation: A Review on the Role of Conservation
Tillage. Plants. 10(10), 2001. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants10102001
MN PCA. (2022). Air Pollutant: Sulfur dioxide. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency.
https://www.pca.state.mn.us/pollutants-and-contaminants/sulfur-dioxide
Oquist, K.A., Strock, J.S., Mulla, D.J. (2007) Influence of Alternative and Conventional Farming
Practices on Subsurface Drainage andWater Quality. Journal of Environmental Quality.
36(4), 1194-1204. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2006.0274
Poudel, D.D., Horwath, W.R., Lanini, W.T., Temple, S.R., Bruggen, A.H.C. (2002) Comparison
 of soil N availability and leaching potential, crop yields and weeds in organic, low-input
and conventional farming systems in northern California. Agriculture, Ecosystems &
Environment. 90(2), 125-137. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8809(01)00196-7
UCS. (2022). What Is Sustainable Agriculture? Union of Concerned Scientists.
https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/what-sustainable-agriculture
USDA. (2022). Ag and Food Sectors and the Economy. USDA: Economic Research Service.
https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/ag-and-food-statistics-charting-the-essentials/ag-
and-food-sectors-and-the-economy/
Water Resources. (2019). Agricultural Contaminants. United States Geological Survey (USGS).
https://www.usgs.gov/mission-areas/water-resources/science/agricultural-contaminants