The purpose of a rhetorical analysis is to examine how a creator communicates a message, not whether you agree with it.

Instead of asking “Is this right or wrong?”, you ask:

  • How is the message constructed?

  • Why does it work (or not) for its audience?

  • What strategies does the author use to persuade, inform, or influence?

Angel Mendez
Professor Labbe
English 1007
4 October 2025
A Rhetorical Analysis
In “The Climate Crisis at the End of Our Fork,” by Anna Lappe. Lappe talks about how
the food we consume and how it's produced are directly connected to climate change. Lappe
explains that cutting down forests, industrial farming, and the global food system releases huge
amounts of greenhouse gases, which worsen the problem. This is a big deal due to climate
change causing rising temperatures, stronger storms, and damage to the environment, destroying
our world. Lappe’s essay shows everyday choices, like eating too much industrial produced
meat, and industrial farming practices, and food waste has a huge effect on the environment.
Lappe's argument is effective because she uses ethos, pathos, and logos to convince the readers
as consumers, just like me, that fixing our food system is an important part of solving climate
change.
Lappe proves that she knows what she's talking about using research and expert opinions
to back up her claims about climate change and food. We as consumers never question what we
get in supermarkets are causing the climate change to worsen. Ethos appeals to credibility and
data to persuade us consumers. This is an example of ethos, she points out that, “The result of
four years of work by hundreds of scientists and reviewers, the International Assessment of
Agriculture Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD) calls for supporting
agroecological systems…” (Lappé 41). This quote means that a large group of scientists and


Mendez 2
experts spent four years researching how agriculture affects the environment and the future of
farming. Statistics show that we should support agroecological systems, which are farming
methods that work with nature instead of against it. Lappe shows how much she researched
understanding the problem in itself as a reliable source. The way she is able to shift a complex
issue with clarity and precision further reinforces her ethos being more persuasive to readers. A
simple and easy way to fix our eating habits is by buying food from local farmers’ markets or
small farms means less pollution from transportation and supports better land use.
Logos is the appeal to logic and reason. It’s when a writer or speaker uses facts, statistics,
evidence, or clear reasoning to convince the audience that their argument makes sense. Lappe
uses facts and logical reasoning to show that our food choices directly affect climate change.
This is a good lead to her argument using logos. Lappe explains that, “Ruminants, such as cattle,
buffalo, sheep, and goats, are among the main agricultural sources of methane… Enteric
fermentation accounts for 25 percent of the total emissions from the livestock sector; land use
changes account for another 35.4 percent; manure accounts for 30.5 percent” (Lappé 28). Lappé
is explaining that animals like cows, sheep, goats, and buffalo produce a lot of methane, a
powerful greenhouse gas that traps heat in the atmosphere. Now Lappe is not telling us
consumers to stop eating meat altogether, rather supporting farms using sustainable or
regenerative practices, which manage manure properly and rotate grazing to protect soil. By
including clear data it helps the readers understand exactly how the production of food can
influence global warming. Lappe also connects these facts to everyday actions. That what we eat
and its transportation has a link to a bigger danger to the environment. This connects logic


Mendez 3
between the food systems cause and effect. This in her essay convinces many because she uses
logic that anyone can follow.
To add onto this Lappe appeals to readers' emotions by making them feel frightened,
responsible, and motivated to help her ideas. That being pathos when a writer or speaker tries to
make the audience feel something (like sadness, hope, anger, or compassion) to persuade them.
Lappe uses vivid imagery and real life examples to make the impact of our choices of food feel
worse. Lappe writes, “When you’re sitting in front of a steaming plate of macaroni and cheese,
you’re not imagining plumes of greenhouse gases. You’re thinking, dinner” (Lappé 48). This
quote means when we eat something simple like macaroni and cheese, we usually just think
about enjoying our meal. Not about the pollution or greenhouse gases created while producing,
processing, and transporting that food. Lappé is showing how disconnected people are from the
environmental impact of their diet. The use of rhetorical tools such as pathos in this essay makes
the readers aware of their eating habits on an everyday basis and how it could affect the reader
with guilt. Using pathos Lappe for me successfully helps appeal to all her problems using the
audience's emotions. I personally felt that my choices really do matter and I am encouraged to
take responsibility. A way to solve this issue is by becoming more aware of where our food
comes from and how it’s made. Buy local or organic foods that use fewer chemicals and less
energy to produce.
Lappe's essay helps show the way we produce and consume food has a huge impact on
climate change, from industrial farming to transportation and waste. Lappe's argument is



Mendez 4
convincing because she combines the rhetorical tools such as ethos, pathos, and logos to make
readers understand both the scale of the problem and the power our actions have.
What does this mean to our environment if this keeps going on?
If we don’t fix these issues, it means our planet will continue to get hotter and more
unstable. The greenhouse gases released from food production, like carbon dioxide and methane
will keep trapping heat in the atmosphere. This is a big issue causing more extreme weather,
such as stronger storms, floods, droughts, and wildfires. The loss of biodiversity, as forests are
destroyed and animal habitats disappear. Rising sea levels from melting ice caps, which can
flood coastal cities. To help address these issues, we can support local and organic farms, reduce
meat consumption, and to not waste food. I believe that governments and companies could make
stricter regulations on industrial farming, make sustainable agriculture, and invest in alternative
good systems. With making these changes I believe that we can reduce greenhouse gas
emissions, protect our habitats, and create a healthier planet. Lappe's essay used rhetorical tools
like ethos, pathos, and logos, to help persuade us consumers that the choices we make can cause
global warming to worsen, we should take responsibility and change our actions to better our
world. The rhetorical uses that Lappe's essay uses also affected the way I see the problem as a
whole. Lappe uses logic, emotion, and data to help her persuade us readers.



Mendez 5
“Climate Change.” NASA Science, 26 Sept. 2025, science.nasa.gov/climate-change/.
Accessed 5 Oct. 2025.
“Courses.” Courses, courses.bncollege.com/, Accessed 4 Oct. 2025.
“VitalSource Bookshelf Online.” VitalSource Bookshelf Online, reader.yuzu.com/.
Accessed 4 Oct. 2025.t started