They say everything has a price, even when it comes to the foods you eat. Out-of-pocket cost reflects the environmental price tag. That lobster dinner at the restaurant costs as much as it does because of the effort and transportation expenses needed to bring it to your table.
A study by Lancaster University and Small World Consulting provides a more precise picture of the environmental cost associated with different food items based on findings in the United Kingdom. The researchers determined that the greenhouse gas emissions per person averaged 7.4 kg of carbon dioxide equivalents per day.
Impact of Different Food Items
Meats, of course, carry the highest price tag, resulting in the highest emissions of all food groups. Cheese also carried a higher environmental cost because of its association with livestock. Methane and nitrous oxide emissions contributed to their greenhouse gas emissions. Other findings included the cost of exotic produce.
Researchers calculated the cost of meat at 17 kg of carbon dioxide equivalent per kilogram, whereas exotic produce weighed in at 9 kg. Local produce, on the other hand, had an impact of 2 kg. These findings make a strong case for choosing local and in-season produce at the grocery store.
Putting the numbers together, the researchers concluded that a vegetarian or vegan diet offers substantial environmental savings of 22 to 26 percent of tons of carbon dioxide equivalents. While food makes up a relatively small portion of your carbon footprint, the reduction in cost still is significant.
Trends in Meat Consumption
Aside from the environmental costs, reducing the amount of meat in your diet makes good sense from a health perspective. Meat contains saturated fats, which have been linked to cardiovascular disease. Fruits and vegetables contain negligible amounts of fats.
Recent data shows a downward trend in meat consumption. The USDA estimated that beef consumption in the United States averaged 57.5 lbs. per capita in 2011, down from 61.1 lbs. in 2009. These figures may reflect the economic picture rather than a health-motivated lifestyle change. If that is indeed the case, a self-limiting mechanism exists.
While the environment may not be the driving factor, it certainly benefits from consumers’ move away from meat and toward more affordable and eco-friendly choices like local produce. The trend toward healthier meat consumption may be in the works.
