Food production is responsible for one-quarter of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions.
Eating locally would only have a significant impact if transport was responsible for a large share of food’s final carbon footprint. For most foods, this is not the case.
Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from transportation make up a very small amount of the emissions from food, and what you eat is far more important than where your food traveled from.
For most foods — and particularly the largest emitters — most GHG emissions result from land use change (shown in green) and from processes at the farm stage (brown). Farm-stage emissions include processes such as the application of fertilizers — both organic (“manure management”) and synthetic; and enteric fermentation (the production of methane in the stomachs of cattle). Combined, land use and farm-stage emissions account for more than 80% of the footprint for most foods.
Transport is a small contributor to emissions. For most food products, it accounts for less than 10%, and it’s much smaller for the largest GHG emitters. In beef from beef herds, it’s 0.5%.
37 Comments
the_abecedarian@piefed.social · 65 pts · 75d
The concept of a personal "carbon footprint" was popularized by oil companies to refocus attention away from their responsibility for climate change
Korhaka@sopuli.xyz · 34 pts · 75d
To keep my carbon footprint low I dont buy from oil companies
MachineFab812@discuss.tchncs.de · 6 pts · 75d
That one step is the one they were trying to avoid with the rest of this non-sense. You're not going to make up the difference for others not doing the same, with this stuff, or telling others to do this stuff.
Korhaka@sopuli.xyz · 8 pts · 74d
And now those people are the ones crying about fuel prices while I don't give a shit because I don't even want it.
MachineFab812@discuss.tchncs.de · 1 pts · 73d
I just refuse to budget more for fuel when its more expensive. Gimme an excuse to refuse to leave the house because I don't have the fuel in my car to drive across town for whatever non-sense and still make it to work until pay-day, I'm going to take it.
Korhaka@sopuli.xyz · 2 pts · 73d
Suppose I do this too, just that my budget is always zero
MachineFab812@discuss.tchncs.de · 1 pts · 73d
I mean, yes, but the point I was making is that most people don't, and so demand doesn't adjust to supply or pricing quite as-it-should. I've got a few more payments to make on the vehicles I have before EV's become anything-like a feasible option for me.
CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 75d
It's a useful tool, but you are correct that everything is overwhelmingly dominated by primary use of fossil fuels.
W98BSoD@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 6 pts · 73d
Jimny_Crkt@slrpnk.net · 22 pts · 74d
In my mind, local food is more about the economics of supporting small businesses in your community. Sure, eating beans and lentils shipped across the world to your closest whole foods may have a smaller carbon footprint, but your money is still being siphoned to the big businesses in that supply chain.
bitteroldcoot@piefed.social · 18 pts · 75d
For many years after I retired I didn't drive at all. I could go a month without using the car. Really was proud of myself for saving the planet.
Then my health went to hell. I'm always driving to the doctor, and eating a lot of beef (anemic). I'm actually tired of eating beef. But the other option is transfusions, so carbon footprint be damned.
Give me a couple of years and I'll show how to reduce carbon footprint. It's not going to look pretty thought.
But as others have said, how much carbon footprint does Bezos yacht have?
HubertManne@piefed.social · 6 pts · 75d
I get this. My wife has medical issues and we can't exactly walk everywhere and she can't ride a bike at all comfortably. We actually put a lot of time into finding something that would work and she hurt herself. Granted we were looking at affordable options.
bassicvgyn@lemmy.vg · 2 pts · 75d
Sorry that happened that must have been a real bummer.
HubertManne@piefed.social · 2 pts · 74d
well yeah its our life situation and others have worse.
towerful@programming.dev · 5 pts · 73d
This is my conclusion as well.
I am conscientious about what I use/buy/eat, preferring local products even if they cost a bit more. I like walking and public transport is super convenient.
As long as I'm not buying Nestlé (as much as I can, I'm still surprised by finding Nestlé products). Fuck Nestlé
ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net · 3 pts · 74d
Would beef-liver supplements (like in pill form) be enough iron to replace the beef?
bitteroldcoot@piefed.social · 3 pts · 74d
They carry their own problems. I tried several iron supplements. Weirdly, a common side effect is excruciating back pain. Just eating unprocessed beef works best.
ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net · 3 pts · 74d
Ah, bummer :(
W98BSoD@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 73d
cadekat@pawb.social · 17 pts · 74d
Why does the article compare kilograms of food instead of equivalent calorie amounts?
The study provides data per 100g of protein, which seems like more useful comparison.
Allero@lemmy.today · 8 pts · 74d
https://sci-hub.ru/10.1126/science.aaq0216
FTFY
cadekat@pawb.social · 3 pts · 74d
Yep, that's the one!
Zacryon@feddit.org · 10 pts · 73d
Okay, but how about we eat the rich instead?
foxymochakitten@slrpnk.net · 3 pts · 73d
The consumption of Elon Musk has been proven to be significantly more effective at reducing carbon than eating pork, beef or chicken
Karjalan@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 74d
Why is every meat called by it's food name (beef, mutton, poultry etc) except for pork... Which is "pig meat"?
Railcar8095@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 74d
Maybe to differentiate from pork in general and products made with pork (Bacon, sausages...).
Just a thought, no source
Randelung@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 74d
Is beef a name for cows used outside of food?
faythofdragons@slrpnk.net · 5 pts · 74d
Yep. Growing up in cattle country, you'd hear ranches brag about how many beef cattle they're raising, and it gets shortened to "I've got 30k heads of beef this season".
CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 74d
What about manflesh? Would this be rated high CO2 content, or low because eating the emitter is probably one of the best ways to get emissions down.
AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 74d
That's just long pig.
CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 74d
A connoisseur, I see.
osanna@lemmy.vg · 9 pts · 73d
I’m just spitballing here, but what if….. we all went vegan and stopped having children??
AHemlocksLie@lemmy.zip · 11 pts · 73d
The problem is the system, not the head count. As AI and automation advances, the capitalist class will have no problem causing just as much ecological damage with a hundredth of the current population.
Tiresia@slrpnk.net · 2 pts · 73d
People don't produce all that much CO2, and by stewarding (food) forests and tending gardens they can be part of an ecosystem that absorbs more CO2 than they produce.
If you care enough about the environment to go vegan, you can raise your children to be net positive for the planet.
That does mean destroying capitalism, including most of the automotive industry, agriculture industry, aviation industry, data centers, and more.
Sunsofold@lemmings.world · 1 pts · 73d
But muh Xbox n Mustang n burgers!
Gsus4@mander.xyz · 7 pts · 75d
You can see this directly from the Iran war effects: peaking oil prices and fossil scarcity are harming food production more globally (via fertilizers, pesticides, tractors) than transporting it.
Nighed@feddit.uk · 2 pts · 74d
I didn't realise sheep farted so much!
magnetosphere@fedia.io · 1 pts · 75d
fodor@lemmy.zip · 0 pts · 74d