When we look at the carbon footprint of diets we often overlook the 'opportunity cost' of how we could use the land if not for food production.
A new paper in @naturesustainab tries to quantify the 'opportunity cost' of producing meat and dairy.
nature.com/articles/s4189…
A new paper in @naturesustainab tries to quantify the 'opportunity cost' of producing meat and dairy.
nature.com/articles/s4189…
Half of the world's habitable land is used for agriculture. Three-quarters for livestock.
The paper looks at how much carbon we could sequester if everyone adopted the EAT-Lancet diet (which has some meat & dairy, but much less than the current Western diet) or a vegan diet.
The paper looks at how much carbon we could sequester if everyone adopted the EAT-Lancet diet (which has some meat & dairy, but much less than the current Western diet) or a vegan diet.
It estimates that through ecosystem restoration we could sequester the equivalent of 9 years of fossil fuel emissions by 2050 on the EAT-Lancet diet.
Or 16 years of fossil emissions on the vegan diet.
Or 16 years of fossil emissions on the vegan diet.
These emissions reductions are on top of the reductions we'd see from agricultural production itself.
What's clear is that isn't a miracle cure for CO2. We still need to get off fossil fuels. But it could possibly 'buy us' some room in the budget or some years to move faster.
What's clear is that isn't a miracle cure for CO2. We still need to get off fossil fuels. But it could possibly 'buy us' some room in the budget or some years to move faster.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
