IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v43y2012icp184-190.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The relative greenhouse gas impacts of realistic dietary choices

Author

Listed:
  • Berners-Lee, M.
  • Hoolohan, C.
  • Cammack, H.
  • Hewitt, C.N.

Abstract

The greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions embodied in 61 different categories of food are used, with information on the diet of different groups of the population (omnivorous, vegetarian and vegan), to calculate the embodied GHG emissions in different dietary scenarios. We calculate that the embodied GHG content of the current UK food supply is 7.4kg CO2eperson−1day−1, or 2.7tCO2eperson−1y−1. This gives total food-related GHG emissions of 167MtCO2e (1Mt=106 metric tonnes; CO2e being the mass of CO2 that would have the same global warming potential, when measured over 100 years, as a given mixture of greenhouse gases) for the entire UK population in 2009. This is 27% of total direct GHG emissions in the UK, or 19% of total GHG emissions from the UK, including those embodied in goods produced abroad. We calculate that potential GHG savings of 22% and 26% can be made by changing from the current UK-average diet to a vegetarian or vegan diet, respectively. Taking the average GHG saving from six vegetarian or vegan dietary scenarios compared with the current UK-average diet gives a potential national GHG saving of 40MtCO2ey−1. This is equivalent to a 50% reduction in current exhaust pipe emissions from the entire UK passenger car fleet. Hence realistic choices about diet can make substantial differences to embodied GHG emissions.

Suggested Citation

  • Berners-Lee, M. & Hoolohan, C. & Cammack, H. & Hewitt, C.N., 2012. "The relative greenhouse gas impacts of realistic dietary choices," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 184-190.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:43:y:2012:i:c:p:184-190
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2011.12.054
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421511010603
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.12.054?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Druckman, Angela & Jackson, Tim, 2009. "The carbon footprint of UK households 1990-2004: A socio-economically disaggregated, quasi-multi-regional input-output model," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(7), pages 2066-2077, May.
    2. Kramer, Klaas Jan & Moll, Henri C. & Nonhebel, Sanderine & Wilting, Harry C., 1999. "Greenhouse gas emissions related to Dutch food consumption," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 203-216, April.
    3. Goodland, Robert, 1997. "Environmental sustainability in agriculture: diet matters," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 189-200, December.
    4. Carlsson-Kanyama, Annika, 1998. "Climate change and dietary choices -- how can emissions of greenhouse gases from food consumption be reduced?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(3-4), pages 277-293, November.
    5. Carlsson-Kanyama, Annika & Ekstrom, Marianne Pipping & Shanahan, Helena, 2003. "Food and life cycle energy inputs: consequences of diet and ways to increase efficiency," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(2-3), pages 293-307, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wood, Richard & Lenzen, Manfred & Dey, Christopher & Lundie, Sven, 2006. "A comparative study of some environmental impacts of conventional and organic farming in Australia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 89(2-3), pages 324-348, September.
    2. Michael Huesemann & Joyce Huesemann, 2008. "Will progress in science and technology avert or accelerate global collapse? A critical analysis and policy recommendations," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 10(6), pages 787-825, December.
    3. Ghada Talat Alhothali & Noha M. Almoraie & Israa M. Shatwan & Najlaa M. Aljefree, 2021. "Sociodemographic Characteristics and Dietary Choices as Determinants of Climate Change Understanding and Concern in Saudi Arabia," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(20), pages 1-14, October.
    4. Druckman, Angela & Jackson, Tim, 2010. "The bare necessities: How much household carbon do we really need?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(9), pages 1794-1804, July.
    5. Keyzer, M.A. & Merbis, M.D. & Pavel, I.F.P.W. & van Wesenbeeck, C.F.A., 2005. "Diet shifts towards meat and the effects on cereal use: can we feed the animals in 2030?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 187-202, November.
    6. Panzone, Luca A. & Wossink, Ada & Southerton, Dale, 2013. "The design of an environmental index of sustainable food consumption: A pilot study using supermarket data," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 44-55.
    7. Xiaowei Ma & Mei Wang & Chuandong Li, 2019. "A Summary on Research of Household Energy Consumption: A Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-17, December.
    8. Chiara Lombardini & Leena Lankoski, 2013. "Forced Choice Restriction in Promoting Sustainable Food Consumption: Intended and Unintended Effects of the Mandatory Vegetarian Day in Helsinki Schools," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 159-178, June.
    9. Hadjikakou, Michalis, 2017. "Trimming the excess: environmental impacts of discretionary food consumption in Australia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 119-128.
    10. Jerome Vanclay & John Shortiss & Scott Aulsebrook & Angus Gillespie & Ben Howell & Rhoda Johanni & Michael Maher & Kelly Mitchell & Mark Stewart & Jim Yates, 2011. "Customer Response to Carbon Labelling of Groceries," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 153-160, March.
    11. González, Alejandro D. & Frostell, Björn & Carlsson-Kanyama, Annika, 2011. "Protein efficiency per unit energy and per unit greenhouse gas emissions: Potential contribution of diet choices to climate change mitigation," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 562-570, October.
    12. Martina Schäfer & Melanie Jaeger-Erben & Aguinaldo Santos, 2011. "Leapfrogging to Sustainable Consumption? An Explorative Survey of Consumption Habits and Orientations in Southern Brazil," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 175-196, March.
    13. Pelletier, N., 2008. "Environmental performance in the US broiler poultry sector: Life cycle energy use and greenhouse gas, ozone depleting, acidifying and eutrophying emissions," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 98(2), pages 67-73, September.
    14. Vinnari, Markus & Tapio, Petri, 2012. "Sustainability of diets: From concepts to governance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 46-54.
    15. Valeria De Laurentiis & Dexter V.L. Hunt & Christopher D.F. Rogers, 2016. "Overcoming Food Security Challenges within an Energy/Water/Food Nexus (EWFN) Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-23, January.
    16. Alfredsson, E.C., 2004. "“Green” consumption—no solution for climate change," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 513-524.
    17. Lombardini, Chiara & Lankoski, Leena, 2011. "An Economic-Psychological Model of Sustainable Food Consumption," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114403, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Abeliotis, Konstadinos & Costarelli, Vassiliki & Anagnostopoulos, Konstadinos, 2016. "The Effect of Different Types of Diet on Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Greece," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 7(1), pages 1-14, February.
    19. Thibert, Joël & Badami, Madhav G., 2011. "Estimating and communicating food system impacts: A case study in Montreal, Quebec," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(10), pages 1814-1821, August.
    20. Nonhebel, Sanderine, 2004. "On resource use in food production systems: the value of livestock as 'rest-stream upgrading system'," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 221-230, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:43:y:2012:i:c:p:184-190. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.