How to… exaggerate

We sometimes exaggerate an action or state, the size or quantity of something, or make comparisons in order to emphasise a point and/or create a more dramatic effect. We tend to do this in more informal situations. Notice that when we make comparisons or describe likenesses, the comparison or likeness is exaggerated.

Exaggerated actions or states
My (feet) are killing me.
I’m starving. (I could eat a horse.)
I’d die of (embarrassment/shame).
I wouldn’t be seen dead in (a pair of shoes like that).

Exaggerated size or quantity
You take/It takes (forever/hours) to (do it).
(I bet) they cost a fortune.
They’re about ten sizes too small.
I’ve told you (a million) times, (I don’t like denim jackets).
It looks like (it’s been around for centuries).

Comparisons or likenesses
There’s nothing better than (shopping at
a vintage store).
It’s like trying to fi nd a needle in a
haystack.
You’ll (literally) be green with envy.

The modern food system has become a double-edged sword that cuts across every continent, connecting distant farms to urban dinner tables while simultaneously threatening the very foundations of environmental sustainability. As the world becomes increasingly interconnected, the globalization of food has set in motion a complex web of economic opportunities and ecological disasters that demands our immediate attention. This transformation has turned the simple act of eating into a global affair that leaves a massive carbon footprint stretching from field to fork.

The sheer scale of today's global food network is mind-boggling. Recent scientific studies reveal that food systems are responsible for one-quarter to one-third of the world's greenhouse gas emissions, while food systems account for 70 percent of water extracted from nature, cause 60 percent of biodiversity loss, and generate up to a third of human greenhouse gas emissions. These staggering figures paint a picture of an industry that has spiraled out of control, leaving environmental destruction in its wake as it chases profits across international borders.

The race to the bottom in terms of production costs has fundamentally altered how we grow, process, and transport food. Multinational corporations have bent over backwards to establish supply chains that span continents, often prioritizing efficiency and profit margins over environmental stewardship. This has resulted in a system where food miles account for nearly 20 percent of all food-system emissions, as products crisscross the globe multiple times before reaching consumers. The irony is that while we can now enjoy tropical fruits in winter and seasonal delicacies year-round, we're essentially eating our way to environmental catastrophe.

The environmental toll of this globalized system hits you like a ton of bricks when you examine the numbers. More than three-quarters of global agricultural land is used for livestock, despite meat and dairy making up a much smaller share of the world's protein and calories. This misallocation of resources has thrown a wrench in the works of sustainable development, as vast tracts of forest are cleared to make room for cattle ranches and feed crops that will ultimately support meat production thousands of miles away.

Food waste represents another critical piece of the puzzle that environmental advocates are grappling with. Over 1 billion tons of food – 17 percent of all food available to consumers worldwide – goes into trash bins every year, contributing more than 8-10 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. This waste is occurring at every level of the supply chain, from post-harvest losses in developing countries to consumer waste in affluent nations. It's a classic case of throwing good money after bad, where resources are squandered at an astronomical scale while millions go hungry.

The globalization of food has also thrown local food systems under the bus in many regions. Small-scale farmers find themselves caught between a rock and a hard place as they struggle to compete with industrial operations that can flood markets with cheap imports. This has led to a vicious cycle where traditional agricultural practices are abandoned in favor of monoculture farming that depletes soil nutrients and reduces biodiversity. The result is a system that puts all its eggs in one basket, becoming increasingly vulnerable to climate shocks and pest outbreaks.

The environmental implications of this transformation go far beyond simple carbon accounting. 94% of non-human mammal biomass is livestock, meaning livestock outweigh wild mammals by a factor of 15-to-1, while 71% of bird biomass is poultry livestock. These figures reveal how thoroughly human food production has turned the natural world upside down, creating artificial ecosystems dominated by a handful of domesticated species while wild populations crash.

Climate change is now throwing a monkey wrench into the entire global food system, creating feedback loops that threaten to knock the whole house of cards down. Extreme weather events are becoming more frequent and severe, disrupting production in key agricultural regions and sending shockwaves through international markets. When floods hit major grain-producing areas or droughts devastate livestock regions, the effects ripple through the global supply chain like dominoes falling in sequence.

The concentration of power in the hands of a few multinational corporations has created a system where market manipulation can leave entire populations hanging by a thread. These agribusiness giants call the shots when it comes to seed varieties, fertilizer prices, and distribution networks, effectively holding smaller players over a barrel. This consolidation has made the global food system increasingly brittle, as disruptions to major players can send tremors throughout the entire network.

Water resources are bearing the brunt of this intensified agricultural system. Food systems are responsible for 70 percent of the water extracted from nature, often in regions where water scarcity is already pushing communities to the breaking point. Irrigation systems drain aquifers that took millennia to fill, while agricultural runoff contaminates freshwater sources with pesticides and fertilizers, creating dead zones in rivers and coastal areas.

The promise of technology to solve these mounting problems often turns out to be fool's gold upon closer examination. While precision agriculture and vertical farming capture headlines, they often require massive energy inputs and sophisticated infrastructure that put them out of reach for most of the world's farmers. These high-tech solutions frequently miss the forest for the trees, addressing symptoms rather than the fundamental structural problems that plague the global food system.

The social costs of food globalization are equally devastating, though they often fly under the radar compared to environmental concerns. Rural communities that once thrived on diverse agricultural economies now find themselves left high and dry as industrial farming takes over. Young people abandon traditional farming practices in droves, seeking opportunities in urban areas and leaving behind centuries of accumulated knowledge about sustainable agriculture.

The COVID-19 pandemic pulled back the curtain on just how fragile these global supply chains really are. When borders closed and transportation networks ground to a halt, many countries suddenly found themselves up the creek without a paddle, unable to access basic food supplies that they had become accustomed to importing. This wake-up call highlighted the dangers of putting too many eggs in the globalization basket without maintaining adequate local food security.

Looking ahead, the writing is on the wall regarding the need for fundamental changes to how we organize global food systems. The food we eat today is unsustainable because it causes unacceptable environmental impacts and depletes non-renewable resources, making our food essentially 'fossil food'. Scientists are increasingly calling for a transition away from industrial agriculture toward more localized, regenerative systems that work with natural processes rather than against them.

The path forward requires governments to stop beating around the bush and implement policies that address the root causes of these problems. This means getting tough on corporate concentration, investing in local food systems, and creating incentives for sustainable farming practices. It also means consumers need to bite the bullet and accept that true sustainability might require giving up some of the convenience and variety that globalization has provided.

The time has come to face the music about the environmental costs of our globalized food system. While international trade will always play a role in feeding the world's population, the current model is clearly unsustainable and needs a complete overhaul. The challenge is finding ways to maintain food security while drastically reducing the environmental footprint of agriculture. This will require unprecedented cooperation between nations, innovative policies that prioritize long-term sustainability over short-term profits, and a fundamental shift in how we think about food production and consumption.

The stakes couldn't be higher as we stand at this crossroads. The decisions made in the coming years will determine whether future generations inherit a world where food systems work in harmony with natural ecosystems or one where environmental degradation makes large parts of the planet unsuitable for agriculture. The globalization of food has brought us to this critical juncture, and now it's up to us to chart a course toward a more sustainable future.

Sentence stress refers to emphasizing certain words in a sentence to highlight their importance. Exaggeration in sentence stress means deliberately making these stressed words much louder, longer, or higher in pitch than they would normally be. This technique helps learners hear and feel the rhythm of English more clearly and understand which words are most important for meaning.

For example, in the sentence "I didn't say he stole the money," you can exaggerate different words to change the meaning:
- "**I** didn't say he stole the money." (Someone else did.)
- "I **didn't** say he stole the money." (You deny saying it.)
- "I didn't say **he** stole the money." (Someone else may have stolen it.)