The consumption of meat and fish accounts for a significant proportion of CO₂ emissions from our diet. Every portion makes a difference overall. A good tip: cut back on your consumption and enjoy it all the more.

Savings potential

Every piece of meat you don’t eat makes a difference overall. Of course, the potential savings depend on how much less you eat.

Background

Eating meat is the most inefficient form of calorie consumption, because it extends the food chain beyond the animal, which itself feeds on plants. This is reflected in the severe environmental impact of livestock farming, which is very resource-intensive and produces significantly more greenhouse gas emissions than the cultivation of plant-based foods.

Back in our grandparents’ day, meat was still a delicacy. There wasn’t meat every day, because it was expensive. But it was relished all the more for that. As purchasing power increased, so did the consumption of animal products. Meat consumption has levelled off at an extremely high level. In its dietary recommendations, the Confederation advises eating a maximum of 100 to 120 grams of meat two to three times a week. This would amount to just under 19 kilograms per person per year – in real terms, however, consumption remains constant at around 50 kilograms.

Here’s how it works

• Question things: ask yourself how often you eat meat and whether it’s really always necessary. Do you really enjoy it every time or is it sometimes just habit?
• Set aside meat-free days: meat-free days are a good start. Start with one day and add more when you feel ready.
• Cut back for each meal: another way is to reduce the amount of meat per meal. A little bacon in your spaghetti carbonara or three slices of salami on a pizza are a lot less than a 250 gram steak.

We know that meat has a high carbon footprint. But what many people don’t realize is that not all meat produces the same amount of CO₂. So if you don’t want to go without it, opt for white meat.

Feed and land

One reason for the different carbon footprints of the different meat types is the varying needs of the respective animals in terms of feed and land. The more feed and land an animal needs, the worse the footprint. For example, cows need a great deal more feed and land than chickens.

It is also important to note that more and more forested areas on our planet are being cleared to grow cheap feed for animals in feedlots.

These feedstuffs include for example soya, wheat, corn and barley. This has devastating consequences. On the one hand, forests absorb CO₂ from the atmosphere, while on the other clearing forests for feed production releases considerable amounts of CO₂ and threatens numerous animal and plant species. The biggest losers are the rainforests.

Differences in digestion

But the biggest share of emissions comes from the animals themselves. This is because the process of digestion produces methane, a greenhouse gas which is released into the atmosphere through burping and farting. This is particularly pronounced in ruminants, which is why pork, poultry and fish perform significantly better than beef, veal and lamb.

Fact snack

According to the knowledge platform GEO, the annual methane emissions from one cow have roughly the same impact on the climate as a mid-range car covering 18,000 kilometres per year.

No sacrifice, but more moderation

In terms of protecting the climate, there is no need to persuade the whole of humanity to become vegetarian, quite apart from the fact that this is not a realistic goal. A balanced diet with moderate meat consumption and less food waste are “the key measures that we can easily implement”, according to a Cambridge environmental researcher. Scientists have also developed a scenario for an environmentally-friendly and healthy diet – without excessive consumption of sugar, fat, meat and sausage. In its conclusion, it envisaged two 85 gram portions of red meat (beef, pork, lamb, mutton or goat meat), seven portions of poultry and five eggs per person per week. Realistic, isn’t it?

Summary

Yes, meat consumption does have a massive impact on the environment. But you don’t necessarily have to give up meat completely. If that’s what you want, hats off to you! However, you can also reduce your carbon footprint considerably by simply reducing the amount of meat or switching the type of meat you eat.

Consciously reducing your meat consumption already goes some way towards significantly reducing you carbon footprint. Supplementing or replacing it with plant-based proteins will then further sharply reduce your CO₂ emissions. Make a difference with every meal.

Savings potential

By eating plant-based alternatives, you can reduce your emissions by 55 to 90 percent, depending on the type of meat you replace.

Here’s how it works

• The proof is in the pudding: just give the ever-increasing choice of alternatives a try. Some are good, while others, let’s say, are debatable. But in terms of protein sources, plant-based alternatives are often in no way inferior to meat.
• Take advantage of quick wins: there are various dishes that aren’t based on meat. For example, a bolognese with vegan mince goes down just as well as tortillas and fajitas with vegan pulled pork.
• Raise your awareness: with every meal we eat, we make decisions about how food is produced, how many resources are needed to produce it and where the food comes from. In a nutshell: when it comes to our diet, we have a major impact on the environment.

The influence of eco-labels on our food’s carbon footprint is smaller than many people think. Nevertheless, they are a good form of leverage in terms of reducing emissions and increasing the sustainability of foodstuffs in general. So check the labels.

Savings potential

By checking the eco-labels, you can reduce the emissions from your food by an average of around 10 percent. While this might not be an extremely high figure, eco-labels are nevertheless important because they also ensure that the natural environment is managed sustainably and that the people involved are able to live and work under fair conditions.

The influence of eco-labels on the carbon footprint from our food is smaller than many people think. Nevertheless, they are a good form of leverage in terms of reducing emissions and increasing the sustainability of foodstuffs in general. So check the labels.

Savings potential

By checking the eco-labels, you can reduce the emissions from your food by an average of around 10 percent. While this might not be an extremely high figure, eco-labels are nevertheless important because they also ensure that the natural environment is managed sustainably and that the people involved are able to live and work under fair conditions.

Egg and dairy products make up a significant proportion of the carbon footprint from our diet. Their production requires a lot of resources. By enriching your diet with plant-based products, you can make considerable CO₂ savings.

Savings potential

Opting for plant-based products such as almond milk, oat milk yoghurt, etc. produces around 66 percent fewer CO₂ emissions compared to animal-based products.

Here’s how it works

• Give it a try: you can now find a wide range of alternatives in all food markets that make this a much easier proposition. Start by giving new products a try.
• Set aside animal product-free days: you might start by cutting out animal products one day a week, and then upping the effort with additional days.
• Change some meals: you might also start by changing a meal. Breakfast, for example. Less cheese, more oatmeal maybe? Or porridge with oat milk instead of cow’s milk?
• Replace products gradually: another option is to replace one product at a time. For example, replace the milk in your muesli with alternatives such as oat or soya milk.

Eat fruit and vegetables that are in season locally where possible. Seasonality is one of the most important factors when it comes to reducing food-related emissions. Because fruit and vegetables that are not in season locally can quickly have the same carbon footprint as dairy products and meat.

Savings potential

If you consistently buy your fruit and vegetables when in season, you can reduce emissions by over 90 percent compared to occasional in-season shopping.

Background

In season means that fruit and vegetables can grow in the local region during the current season. If this is not the case, the produce comes either from heated greenhouses or refrigerated warehouses, or has been brought to us from a region where it can currently grow. In all three cases, large amounts of energy are used for cultivation, storage or transport, generating CO₂ emissions accordingly.

Here’s how it works

• Follow the seasonal calendar: to keep track, it’s a good idea to take a look at the seasonal calendar before you go shopping.
• Avoid products transported by air: many foods transported by air are now labelled as such. Try to avoid these products where possible.

The influence of eco-labels on our food’s carbon footprint is smaller than many people think. Nevertheless, they are a good form of leverage in terms of reducing emissions and increasing the sustainability of foodstuffs in general. So check the labels when buying fruit and vegetables.

Savings potential

By checking the eco-labels, you can reduce the emissions from your food by an average of around 10 percent. While this might not be an extremely high figure, eco-labels are nevertheless important because they also ensure that the natural environment is managed sustainably and that the people involved are able to live and work under fair conditions.

The consumption of beverages such as coffee, wine and soft drinks can make up a significant proportion your diet’s carbon footprint. Especially when their enjoyment becomes a habit. Here again, less is more.

Background

The size of the carbon footprint from a beverage depends primarily on two factors: production and transport. Depending on the type of drink, there are quite a few differences. For coffee, tea, cocoa and wine, the main relevant factor is cultivation. For soft drinks, mineral water and beer, by contrast, origin plays a more important role, as weight during transport is the factor that makes the difference, and we tend to drink bigger portions.

As a basic principle, plant-based foods have a much lower impact on the environment than animal-based foods. Don’t they? Well most of the time anyway. Because if plant-based foods are heavily processed, this can quickly change. For example, frozen fries have the same carbon footprint as a piece of fresh poultry. You read that right. Reason enough to take a closer look.

More processing, more impact

For every step in the processing of food, energy is required. And this involves more or less CO₂, depending on the source it comes from. The more processing steps a food product undergoes, the bigger its carbon footprint.

Example of frozen fries

A good example of this is frozen fries, which produce around 5.5 kilograms of CO₂ per kilogram. This is roughly equal to the same amount of pork or cream cheese. By contrast, freshly prepared boiled potatoes produce only around 0.2 kilograms of CO₂ per kilogram. That’s 27.5 times less per portion! The reason for the large footprint is a complicated series of processing steps. The potatoes for our much-loved frozen fries are peeled in hot steam, cut, blanched, dried, pre-fried, frozen and transported before they are finally fried and served in our kitchens.

Frozen or tinned vegetables

Preserving fresh vegetables directly instead of keeping them for a long time in the freezer is much more resource-efficient. There are significantly fewer steps. Fresh vegetables straight from the market produce around 0.15 kilograms of CO₂ per kilogram. For vegetables preserved in tins, the footprint triples to 0.5 kilograms of CO₂ per kilogram. The figure is roughly the same for freezing: when frozen is used, 1 kilogram of vegetables produces around 415 grams of CO₂.

Summary

If you’re looking to reduce your diet’s carbon footprint, eat as much fresh and unprocessed food as possible. It’s not only more sustainable, it’s also healthier. Because as a rule, fresh food contains more nutrients and fewer unhealthy additives.

Did you know that rice produces eleven times more CO₂ than potatoes? Giving it almost the same impact as poultry or fish? Neither did we at first. The staples we eat make a difference. So choose them carefully.

Carbon footprint of rice

Why is the carbon footprint of rice so much bigger compared to other staples? Because of the method of cultivation. Rice fields and rice terraces are regularly flooded. As a result, organic matter in the soil rots – and releases methane (CH₄) in the process. The impact of this greenhouse gas is more than 20 times more harmful than carbon dioxide (CO₂). Depending on the cultivation method, you may also get nitrous oxide (N₂O), a gas that is more than 300 times more harmful than CO₂.

The potato – a climate champion

The good news: we have numerous regional staples that are more environmentally-friendly. Especially the potato. At 0.2 kilograms of CO₂ per kilogram, the potato is a true climate champion. This is not to say that you should only eat potatoes. After all, variety is healthy for both you and the environment. But you may well want to include them on your menu a little more often.