• In the absence of calculated carbon footprints on food labels, consumers commonly use other information on labels to estimate the environmental impact. (Getty Images)Source: Getty Images
That carton of eggs may emit more CO₂ than you think.
Luca Panzone, Natasha Auch

The Conversation
5 Jun 2020 - 10:16 AM  UPDATED 5 Jun 2020 - 10:16 AM

How does your food shopping affect the planet? Well, think of it like this – consuming just one egg emits between 260 and 330g of CO₂ to the atmosphere. That's because before that egg can reach your plate, animal feed has to be produced and delivered to the hen that laid it.

That hen then needs heating pumped into the shed it shares with the other hens on the farm, and their eggs have to be transported, often by van, to the shop you buy them from, where they're stored in refrigerators. There's also the packaging that must be made to store the eggs and the process of cooking them to consider.

Carbon-neutral beef: Is it guilt-free steak for the environmentally-aware?
Carbon-neutral beef, available in Australia now, is being posed as a new style of environmentally responsible red meat. But is carbon-neutral beef all it's carved up to be?

All of this takes energy, which, more often than not, is generated using fossil fuels. We can analyse the carbon footprint of a particular food item by working out the number of greenhouse gases that are emitted during the production of raw materials, industrial processing, transport, storage, cooking, consumption, and waste. This is called the "cradle-to-grave" approach.

It can help people better understand how the things we use every day affect the world around us. With that in mind, here are four simple rules to help you reduce the carbon footprint of your food basket during your next shopping trip.

1. Diversify your protein sources

Of all livestock, cows require the most pasture land and the most feed from land-intensive crops. Their burps also generate large quantities of planet-warming methane, making the carbon footprint of beef on average four times higher than pork and poultry. Lamb has a high carbon footprint, and its consumption should be also reduced.

Grains, beans, lentils, soy and tofu, nuts and seeds, mushrooms, and seaweed all contain high levels of protein and require far smaller inputs than animals to grow, giving them a very low carbon footprint. A recent study showed that it's possible to reduce dietary greenhouse gas emissions by 80 per cent, just by reducing meat consumption by 70 per cent and dairy consumption by 65 per cent.

An (almost) A-Z of breakfast grains
These grained-up bowls of goodness keep breakfast interesting with special little touches like coffee syrup and caramelised pears.

2. Organic doesn't mean low carbon

In the absence of calculated carbon footprints on food labels, consumers commonly use other information on labels to estimate the environmental impact. But these can often mislead. Consumers may associate "organic" or "free-range" with higher environmental quality (low pesticide intensity and more natural animal rearing), and by extension assume that they are low-carbon products. But while some organic products, such as milk or olive oil, typically have a lower carbon footprint than regular equivalents, the reverse is true for soy milk and organic and free-range eggs versus barn eggs. For pasta, there's generally no difference between organic and non-organic varieties.

Of course, caring for animal welfare and supporting the limited use of chemical fertiliser are important considerations too. But avoid using these keywords to estimate the carbon burden of foods.

3. Local isn't always best

Buying local products doesn’t guarantee a smaller carbon footprint. Transport is an important contributor to the carbon cost of foods but its not the only carbon cost. In fact, the carbon contribution of transport is higher in low-carbon than high-carbon foods. To this extent, the "food miles" concept, should not be used as an indicator of carbon footprint, because it only considers the transport element of the carbon footprint.

A recent study showed that it's possible to reduce dietary greenhouse gas emissions by 80 per cent, just by reducing meat consumption by 70 per cent and dairy consumption by 65 per cent.

For instance, transport does not increase the footprint for high-carbon products such as meat by much, and it may transpire that lamb from New Zealand in the season of slaughter has lower carbon emissions than British lamb out of season, primarily because of the much lower carbon footprint at rearing, due to more favourable weather that allows the animals to eat more grass and less animal feed. On the other hand, green beans from Kenya or asparagus from Peru will have a low carbon footprint at production, but their carbon footprint is much increased by the flight that gets them to supermarket shelves in the UK.

How to eat fruit and veg in the coming months
Fresh, frozen, canned or preserved; we asked experts about how to get your fruit and vegetable intake over autumn and winter.
How to grow your own fruit and vegetables
Our online series, Harvest, is an 8-week planting guide. Watch our kitchen garden plot grow and join in a plant-along.

Going local is useful for fruit and vegetables in season, but the carbon emitted by growing them in greenhouses in winter means that importing from a country where the produce is in season is usually more sustainable. Of course, best of all would be to eat in synchrony with the natural seasons where you live, if possible.

The carbon footprint of transport can be lower for processed products too. Shipping ground coffee instead of coffee beans or concentrated orange juice rather than oranges implies only transporting the final product, without the waste or the extra water, and using less refrigeration and less packaging. As a result, concentrated orange juice emits less CO₂ than fresh orange juice, and grinding coffee where beans are grown may be more sustainable than importing the beans to be ground elsewhere.

4. Packaging matters

Plastic packaging is not always the evil it's made out to be. Some packaging options, particularly tin and glass, are very heavy, and so can only be transported in smaller quantities. This means that their transport requires more energy per unit of food. As a result, switching from these types of materials to plastic, which is considerably lighter, can reduce carbon emissions. This is particularly the case if the plastic is recyclable.

Plastic packaging can be better than no packaging in some cases. In extending the shelf life of fresh produce, plastic can be an ally in reducing food waste – which produces methane if it goes to landfill.

Where packaging is unavoidable, or necessary to preserve food, select the simplest packaging and ensure it's recyclable.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.


 is a Lecturer in Consumer Behaviour at Newcastle University and  is a PhD Candidate in Behavioural Economics, Newcastle University. Luca Panzone receives funding from Global Food Security (BBSRC/NERC/ESRC); N8 Agri-food, Institute for Research on Sustainability, Newcastle University and Unilever. John Kazer (Carbon Trust) and Lucia Rehackova (Newcastle University) provided assistance during the writing of this article. Natasha Auch receives funding from ESRC and Unilever.

Eating 'organic' doesn't automatically make it good for you
What's better for you: an organic or regular cookie? A new French study reminds us that there's probably no difference between the two (they're both calorific cookies!) and 'organic' doesn't necessarily mean 'nutritious'.
High-protein wattleseed is nuttily delicious and good for you too
Wattleseed is a low-GI, high-protein bush food star that adds flavour to everything from a 'wattlecino' to damper.
Why compostable plastics may be no better for the environment
Confused? The marketing says they're eco-friendly, but the truth is more complicated. #ZeroWasteWeek
High-protein diets: Now a proven way to prevent Alzheimer’s disease
Devouring regular plates full of protein-rich foods can reduce your risk of developing Alzheimer's disease, according to new Australian research.
Swapping sheep and cows for kangaroos and camels could help our environment
We may be what we eat, but our dietary choices also affect the health of the environment, and farmers' back pockets.
Is it organic? When lifestyle choices have gone too far
The farmers’ market idea of 'purity' and the promise of 'natural' and 'simple' supermarket products and 'wholesome' tonics is troubling for Helen Razer.
A slowcooker in a bag helping the environment
A new slow cooker that doesn't require electricity could be the answer to the developing world's battle for cleaner cookstoves: the Wonderbag eliminates hours of cooking over an open fire.