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%.

chart

  • towerful@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    But as others have said, how much carbon footprint does Bezos yacht have?

    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