If you could make a few small changes to your eating habits, what would make the biggest difference to your family's carbon footprint? This post focuses on our biggest bang for buck diet swaps on reaching netzero.
Maybe you already eat a fully plant-based diet, sourced from the local farmer's market that you walk to on the weekend with your keep cup and your string bags. Maybe you don't suffer from being a chocaholic, rarely indulge in store bought biscuits or crackers or a large iced coffee with icecream. Well, uh - that ain't us.
I love a good farmer's market stroll but a good chunk of our weekly shop is still coming from a supermarket visit or the last-minute rush to the local IGA (walking distance at least).
At almost 6 tCO2e per annum, eating is our single biggest household contribution to greenhouse gas emissions, so it makes sense we'd kickstart our year with a food overhaul.
"Emissions from food alone could use up all of our budget for 1.5°C or 2°C – but we have a range of opportunities to avoid this." – Hannah Ritchie, Our World in Data, 2021
I'm tackling diet, purchasing habits and food waste changes to save at least 0.5t CO2e this year. We're starting with a few little food swaps that will make a big difference - today I'll take you through the first two.
Swap #1 - Beef (& some lamb) for pork or poultry
Ok I am not going to be able to give up burgers cold turkey (and no, turkey burgers won't be cutting the mustard here). Scarborough has an abundance of awesome burger places singing their siren calls to me on many a Friday night.
Why would I even consider giving up such a juicy temptation? Because at ten and eight times the greenhouse gas emissions per kg of beef to pork and poultry respectively, giving up beef is one swap that makes a HUGE difference. Now I did some rough maths, and reckon we would eat somewhere in the order of 17-20kg of beef each year. That could contribute around 1.7 to 2.0tCO2e of emissions per year! One little swap, wiping out a huge chunk of our food emissions.
What makes beef such a big emitter? The whole system of raising beef to eat actually contributes to methane, carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide release into the atmosphere. You can read about how much worse methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (NO2) are for the environment on the Targets page. The methane comes from the fact that cows are ruminant animals (there's a more scientific description but think a multi-stomached affair that means they are emitting methane from belching and in their manure. Gross). The ruminant and fertiliser impact are captured in the 'farm' category in the chart below.
Beef, hugely emitting and the single biggest impact swap we can make in our diet. Surprisingly, eating local does not make the difference you would think, although still a good habit to have!
Our main swap ideas? Chilli con carne (a household fave) will swap from beef mince to pork mince, spag bol (not as frequent for us) will again be a pork mince swap, cottage pie will become shepherd's pie (and hence beef to lamb), with the occasional steak being replaced by a nice piece of lamb fillet, a seasoned chicken breast or piece of fish.
New goal 1: cut the beef and swap for a less carbon-intensive protein like pork and chicken.
Swap #2 - Chocolate for a better choice snack
Remember that chocaholic comment earlier? Yep, that's me. Last year I swapped to those delicious single-serving 100g blocks of Lindt dark chocolate varieties (yes, I am fully aware they aren't meant to be single-serves). At the time, I thought this was better for my health, and sure, compared to other chocolates, it was. And dark choccie, full of all those antioxidants, right?
All true, and I won't be debating the benefits of a small daily indulgence in dark chocolate.
But oh, the environmental impact! If we were going to compare the emissions (and calories) from 100g of a few different wholefood snack options, dark chocolate is still coming out way on top, and not in the good way. More than half of the impact is from land use to grow the cacao beans. In the case of dark chocolate, this is actually worse than milk chocolate because of the increased cacao use / density.
I am not giving up chocolate altogether. There are many changes we will be making this year and giving up chocolate wholesale is unrealistic (for me) and quite frankly will suck some of the joy from my life. What I can do is swap some of my chocolate eating for a healthier snacking alternative (literally anything else) such as berries or other fruit for a glucose hit, nuts for a more substantial option or popcorn for something more mindlessly snackable.
What else will I do? Buy chocolate responsibly. No, I don't mean in moderation. Cacao is generally grown within 20 degrees of the equator, think Caribbean and South America, West Africa and parts of Asia. Cacao needs high temps, nutrient rich soil and lots of rainfall to grow. Deforestation is a huge problem as is water use. If you go back to the chart in swap 1, you can also see that losses (chocolate waste) is a surprising chunk of the emissions problem.
Many chocolate brands are aiming for full traceability - where their beans come from, supporting the livelihoods of farmers and trying to eradicate modern slavery. More important to look for is cocoa supply chains that are free from deforestation and sustainable packaging and reduce chocolate waste. Lindt is aiming to be free of deforestation by 2025. Not bad, but that's not helping with this year's targets.
Other brands to keep an eye out for; Darrel Lea - 100% palm oil free and 100% sustainably sourced cocoa, reducing the guilt free. Haigh's (Rainforest Alliance certified) and Pana Organic from Melbourne (sustainable packaging and dairy free) are doing good things towards sustainability and Beyond Good. Some of these will cost you more than the supermarket standards (curse you, artisan chocolates and your deliciousness) but you'll know you are making better choices.
New goal 2: reduce chocolate consumption and check the brands. UTZ, Rainforest Alliance or Fairtrade certified for a start. Oh, and palm oil free.
Comments