Der Ersatz von Fleisch und Milchprodukten durch Alternativen kann die lebensmittelbedingten Emissionen um 50 % und den Landverbrauch um 40 % senken. Eine neue Studie bestätigt, dass diese Diäten reichlich Protein für einen nachhaltigen Lebensstil liefern und unterstreicht gleichzeitig die Bedeutung der Nährstoffvielfalt.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s44458-026-00075-1
16 Kommentare
There is a lot of discourse over how much individuals can do for the climate about how its realistically not possible for a person to fully educate themselves about which products have more or less carbon emissions and that we need government regulation and collective action.
One thing that you can control though is what you eat. You know if you have meat on your plate and you know what type of meat it is. Controlling what is on your plate is the single biggest thing an individual can do to reduce carbon emissions.
It’s definitely up to us normal people to combat climate change and not the multibillion and trillion dollar companies
Companies arent gonna force vegetables onto your plate, you gotta make the choice yourself, tofu over beef
I’m not putting in enough effort understanding the study (trying to figure out what all the blue dot dairy references are since few were labeled). I think I understand that this seems to be more concerned with showing that in order to get proper nutrition with meat & dairy alternatives you still have lower water & ghg impacts.
It seems to me, that the consumption of milk, eggs & poultry (in addition to fruits, grains, vegetables, legumes, plant nutrient sources, etc) has a very low overall impact such that the water, land & CO2 impacts may not be as important to reduce.
Was there a meat reference for fish? I tried skimming the supplemental materials, but did not find anything which would lead me to believe they included fish in the study. I ask, because I’ve previously seen data that indicated fish protein sources are typically lower CO2 than even poultry. Maybe it was omitted since it would be difficult to discuss water scarcity impacts of fishing?
I would rather watch the world explode tomorrow than not eat my steak tonight
And if we all eat dirt and never produce waste, large corporations will still be responsible for 90% of all emissions! That’s the spirit
Just pay attention to oats and the aggressive use of pesticides, mind.
I love this so much. This is propaganda from the billionaires on the level of that crying Indian commercial from the 80’s convincing us to switch to “recyclable” plastic.
First of all, we’ll never get the scale of people required for this reversal to be meaningful. And even if we did get eeeeeveryone on the entire planet to do this , rigidly , for the good of the planet … it’d be far far far too late for the amount of time it’d take , decades of doing this, to make the actual reversal at least start. Ie those 3-4 decades of us following this rigid eating routine would be full of the consequences of climate change and probably billionaires just doing whatever to make it even worse now that “the way the population is eating is going to fix it.” And many would pass on from the effects of climate change in those decades and probably most of the humans except a couple million lucky ones world wide.
Love this type of study. Such a good time to read and smirk at from time to time. Thanks.
While I appreciate there is probably a value, and I have reduced my meat consumption probably 50% in the last 3 years, even with Indian cooking I would not be a pleasant person if I was 100% meat free. I developed lactose intolerance at 40, and have had to cut my Dairy down by like 80% , and that 20% still is painful but life without cheese is not a life.
The scientist in me says cheese isn’t worth it.
The philosopher in me says life isn’t worth it, without it.
The issue unfortunately is not everyone can afford to cut tons of foods out of their diets. I barely eat anything as is because of having a peanut and legume allergy. If I cut dairy, there’s not many alternatives. If I cut meat, there’s also not many alternatives for me. I’m stuck with the current system because alternatives tend to either utilize legumes, peanuts, or sesame.
Beef definitely has a large environmental footprint. I previously studied Environmental Science, where I learned that 1 lb of beef requires 1800 gallons of water to produce! Crazy statistic! So we should all consume more plant-based products when we can!
Stop the wars and then talk…
Everyone in the rural knows meat is a byproduct of agriculture if used smart and not wasted tho
Chickens live off of scraps and bugs for example, rabbits are even more effective turning vegetable waste into meat
First of all, I love how this graph has „falafel“ as a crop.
Second, there is a big piece missing from the equation: aquaculture. We all know about beef, but I fail to see how farmed scallops or mussels cause that much in climate emissions.
Also, this doesn’t look at „alternative“ forms of livestock, like yaks or camels. Yaks can literally live off of tundra grass in northern Canada and produce a LOT less CO2 than cows.
[https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5226831/](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5226831/)
Camels produce even less, and apparently they are both delicious and healthy (the animal, not the cigarettes) [https://ethz.ch/en/news-and-events/eth-news/news/2014/04/camels-emit-less-methane-than-cows-or-sheep.html](https://ethz.ch/en/news-and-events/eth-news/news/2014/04/camels-emit-less-methane-than-cows-or-sheep.html)
This would have no negitive political effects…