Editor’s note: This commentary is by Jaiel Pulskamp, who is the owner/farmer of Kettle Song Farm in Worcester.
[I] became a farmer to grow healthy food, and help shift our nation’s agricultural system away from industrial agriculture. Large-scale chemical intensive agriculture is not only damaging ecosystems, but also human health. So what does this have to do with the sugar tax? Well most of the sugar added to these drinks comes from high fructose corn syrup.
According to the USDA, about 91 million acres of corn were planted in 2014 in the U.S. This produced around 12.36 billion bushels of corn. Approximately 11.5 percent of this corn yield was used for the production of high fructose corn syrup, which is used mostly to sweeten soft drinks. The USDA notes that 93 percent of all corn acres planted in the United States are biotech varieties, grown with chemical fertilizers and sprayed with toxic herbicides and pesticides. In essence, soda and sugary drinks are products of our industrial chemical intensive agriculture system. We need to move away from these processed foods filled with ingredients that are causing the contamination of our water sources, destroying soils, killing bees, contributing to climate change and causing in humans diabetes, cancer, allergies, asthma and possibly leading to increased rates of autism.
It is imperative we consider the negative impact this single ingredient has on human and environmental health. A reduction in the consumption of sugary drinks can also lead to the reduction of acres planted in this resource intensive crop. According to a CERES report, corn receives 15.4 million acre-feet annually of irrigation water. Over half of the country’s irrigated corn production uses groundwater from the over-exploited High Plains aquifer, resulting in high water stress and groundwater depletion.
I believe more education and information should be made available to consumers about the effect of their food choices, and that resources should be established to help lower income families gain access to sustainably grown food, and make healthier food choices.
Additionally, corn requires intensive amounts of chemical fertilizer inputs. As stated in the CERES report, in 2010, 9.5 million tons of nitrogen, phosphorus and potash were applied to U.S. cornfields. “Nitrogen run-off is the single largest source of nutrient pollution to the Gulf of Mexico’s ‘dead zone’, an area the size of Connecticut that is essentially devoid of life.”
Corn also uses large amounts of herbicides such as Roundup, its active ingredient being glyphosate, which not only kills weeds, but also mycorrhizal (fungi), which have been shown to pull carbon out of the atmosphere and sequester it into the soil. In addition, chemicals called neonicotinoids, which are heavily used in corn production, have been linked to colony collapse disorder in bees.
I believe more education and information should be made available to consumers about the effect of their food choices, and that resources should be established to help lower income families gain access to sustainably grown food, and make healthier food choices. Funds raised by a tax on sugary drinks will do just that, by supporting programs like Farm to Family. The reduction in the consumption of high fructose corn syrup through a sugary drinks tax may seem like an insignificant and small step for some, but it is nevertheless a step in the right direction.
Notes:
[Unattributed]: Retrieved Jan. 10, 2015 from http://www.nass.usda.gov/Newsroom/2014/06_30_2014.asp
Barton, Brooke; Clark, Sarah Elizabeth (June 2014) A Ceres Report Water and Climate Risks Facing U.S. Corn Production, Retrieved Jan. 10, 2015 from http://www.ceres.org/issues/water/agriculture/the-cost-of-corn
