High carbon footprint families identified by sweets and restaurant food, not higher meat consumption

University of Sheffield

  • Families with high carbon footprints consume two to three times more sweets and alcohol than those with low footprints
  • Study by experts in Sheffield and Kyoto, Japan, found meat consumption explained less than 10 per cent of difference in carbon footprints
  • Researchers recommend carbon taxes on sweets and alcohol

Families with higher carbon footprints are likely to consume more confectionary, alcohol and restaurant food, according to a new study published in One Earth.

Considering the spectrum of traditional to urban lifestyles across Japan, researchers at the University of Sheffield and the Research Institute for Humanity and Nature in Kyoto, Japan, analysed the carbon footprints of the diets of 60,000 households across Japan’s 47 regions. Using a life-cycle approach which details food supply chains around the country, they found that meat consumption was relatively constant per household – but carbon footprints were not.

The study shows that meat consumption could explain less than 10 per cent of the difference seen in carbon footprints between Japanese families. Instead, households with higher carbon footprints tended to consume more food from restaurants, as well as more vegetables and fish. However, it was the level of consumption of sweets and alcohol – two to three times higher than families with low carbon footprints – that really stood out.

Meat has earned a reputation as an environmentally damaging food, with beef production emitting 20 times more greenhouse gases than bean production for the same amount of protein.

However, the researchers caution against a one-size-fits-all policy after finding that the consumption of sweets, alcohol and restaurant food adds to families’ footprints in a larger capacity than other items. Eating out was found to contribute on average 770 kg of greenhouse gases per year for those households with a higher footprint, whereas meat contributed just 280kg.

Associate Professor Keiichiro Kanemoto of the Research Institute for Humanity and Nature, Kyoto, Japan – who led the research – said: “If we think of a carbon tax, it might be wiser to target sweets and alcohol if we want a progressive system.

“If we are serious about reducing our carbon footprints, then our diets must change. Our findings suggest that high carbon footprints are not only a problem for a small number of meat lovers in Japan. It might be better to target less nutritious foods that are excessively consumed in some populations.”

Kanemoto does, however, recommend eating less meat to reduce a household’s environmental impact. “Meat is a high carbon footprint food. Replacing red meat consumption with white meat and vegetables will lower a family’s carbon footprint,” he said.

Japan’s population is one of the oldest in the world, a trend that many industrial countries are following. This suggests that successful policies for dietary change and energy efficiency in Japan could act as models for many countries in the coming decades. The Japanese also have a relatively healthy diet, which is frequently attributed to them having the world’s longest lifespan by country.

Dr Christian Reynolds from the Institute of Sustainable Food at the University of Sheffield, one of the study’s co-authors, said: “Due to wealth, culture, and farming practices, different regions in a country consume food differently. Japan alone has some prefectures with more than 10 million people and others with fewer than one million. These regional and income differences in food consumption are also found in the UK, Europe, Australia and the US.

“All countries are facing challenges in how to shift diets to be healthier and more sustainable. This evidence from Japan demonstrates that research can help us to identify what to focus on. The same patterns of dietary change in terms of sugar, alcohol and dining out need to be considered in the UK, Australia, the US and Europe.”

###

Notes

Full study available under embargo here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1bxzVxBUM7yw4lgkDjn0YTwJI_cnitNSv/view?usp=sharing

Institute for Sustainable Food

The Institute for Sustainable Food at the University of Sheffield brings together multidisciplinary expertise and world-class research facilities to help achieve food security and protect the natural resources we all depend on.

The University of Sheffield

With almost 29,000 of the brightest students from over 140 countries, learning alongside over 1,200 of the best academics from across the globe, the University of Sheffield is one of the world’s leading universities.

A member of the UK’s prestigious Russell Group of leading research-led institutions, Sheffield offers world-class teaching and research excellence across a wide range of disciplines.

Unified by the power of discovery and understanding, staff and students at the university are committed to finding new ways to transform the world we live in.

Sheffield is the only university to feature in The Sunday Times 100 Best Not-For-Profit Organisations to Work For 2018 and for the last eight years has been ranked in the top five UK universities for Student Satisfaction by Times Higher Education.

Sheffield has six Nobel Prize winners among former staff and students and its alumni go on to hold positions of great responsibility and influence all over the world, making significant contributions in their chosen fields.

Global research partners and clients include Boeing, Rolls-Royce, Unilever, AstraZeneca, Glaxo SmithKline, Siemens and Airbus, as well as many UK and overseas government agencies and charitable foundations.

From EurekAlert!

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

85 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Michael Jankowski
December 22, 2019 9:47 am

Meats, sweets, alcohol…amazing how it is always “vices” that pull double-duty as climate changers.

n.n
December 22, 2019 10:12 am

Families with diverse (i.e. numeric) children. Our Posterity likes carbohydrates and eating out.

Stonyground
December 22, 2019 10:27 am

It seems to be an aspect of human nature that some people have to find something to feel bad about. We are lucky to be living in a golden age. Even countries that are at the very bottom of the ladder are at least getting onto the first rung. The climate bed wetters are 100% wrong. The climate is becoming progressively more benign, in total opposition to their predictions.

There also seems to be an aspect of human nature that means that some people can’t resist the urge to control other people’s lives. This really needs to be identified as a serious character flaw so that anyone showing signs of it can be correctly labelled as a pariah and not be allowed into any position of influence.

Climate Change Alarmism has been the perfect vehicle for both types to further their negative agendas.

billtoo
December 22, 2019 11:36 am

as expected from the diabetes epidemic and a basic understanding of Atkins.

billtoo
December 22, 2019 11:40 am

also, one would think this would set the stage to lay off meat consumption, but we all know they will try to ban alcohol and candy now, as well as meat.

Doc Chuck
Reply to  billtoo
December 22, 2019 3:26 pm

To paraphrase Ronald Reagan’s observation regarding governance: If it’s appealing, tax and regulate it out of reach of the public. And if it draws insufficient public interest, subsidize it beyond all usefulness. That’s the ‘sustainable’ formulation.

ozspeaksup
Reply to  billtoo
December 23, 2019 4:13 am

note white meats ok?
so factory farmed intensive energy using highly concentrated feeds with commensurate energy use to make n transport, pollution from concentrated poop ponds and piles , heavier than natural drug n antibiotic use meat, is just dandy?
but grass fed beef is bad?
because they ASSUME all beef is also CAFO grain fed muck I guess?
6 week old mutant chickens and penned porkers are in no way a cleaner option

mikewaite
December 22, 2019 11:42 am

Sheffield has links to the Grantham Foundation and recently received £1.7million from them for its embedded Grantham Institute for sustainability.
https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/news/nr/grantham-donation-tackle-challenges-food-water-energy-security-1.870957
The personnel there are fully on board with the messages from Greta and Extinction rebellion :

-“Our Director Tony Ryan explains why a new paper by Peter Horton and Ben Horton vindicates Greta Thunberg and Extincton Rebellion’s calls to listen to the scientists.
Why evidence vindicates the Extinction Rebellion and Greta Thunberg by Grantham Centre Director Tony Ryan
“I’m currently teaching a new Chemistry in a Sustainable Future course to 1st year undergraduates and I’ve recommended they read Re-defining Sustainability: Living in Harmony with Life on Earth. In this paper Peter and Ben Horton lay out the scientific consensus behind Greta Thunberg’s message ‘listen to the scientists’.
The paper builds on scientific evidence to challenge the widely held human-centric view that we have the right to exploit everything on Earth. In doing so the Hortons present a vision that vindicates the ambitions of Extinction Rebellion.
We in the Grantham Centre challenge the belief that sustainability can be delivered through exploiting nature in a smarter way and controlling it better. Because we need to live in harmony with all life on Earth by respecting the land, the oceans, and the atmosphere from which everything we hold dear derives.””-

Reply to  mikewaite
December 22, 2019 1:38 pm

But Sheffield University has research partnerships with those companies well known for their zero carbon footprints Rolls-Royce, Airbus and Boeing

Myron
December 22, 2019 12:03 pm

A few years ago wife and I saved money to afford having high quality insulated replacement windows installed on the house. This has made a dramatic difference in our energy bills here in central Texas. We are saving money on our electric bill and using less energy has decreased our ‘carbon footprint’.
With the extra money saved we often go out to eat on Saturday evenings. But this has increased our ‘carbon footprint’.
We better open a bottle of wine and contemplate what we are doing.

Henning Nielsen
December 22, 2019 3:12 pm

First they came for my sugar. Then they came for my butter. Then they came for my cakes. Now they come for my alcohol. That’s where I draw a very red line. I speak as a Viking.

Dodgy Geezer
December 22, 2019 3:23 pm

Is it the case that sweets and drink are actually causing the carbon footprint, or are they just associated with it?

Because richer people tend to live higher up than poorer people, and will have higher footprints, so you might as well tax the altitude of their houses…

John F. Hultquist
December 22, 2019 7:04 pm

If we are serious about reducing our carbon footprints, …

I assume the thing of interest is Carbon Dioxide. I am in favor of it and prefer an increase.
Besides, roasting stuff over an out-door fire is a good time thing.

Global Cooling
December 22, 2019 10:08 pm

You can also think out of the box of the propaganda. You can use carbon footprints to measure the carbon cycle. UN has stated carbon neutrality as a target. So, if you have more cows, you have to grow more grass to suck more CO2 from atmosphere to feed them. If you use hydrocarbon fuels, you can balance that by capturing that carbon into persistent plastics.

In left’s mindset cognitive dissonance is not a problem. Ideas may be inconsistent because you take money from many special interest groups that compete against each other.

December 23, 2019 12:33 am

I could not find out ( even in supplemental pdf) what original post study meant by “confection” which the subjects consumed in order to calculate the load said confection contributed. My understanding is the Japanese don’t consume a lot of very sweet tasting items & so can not see how “sugar” confections would be a high driving factor. I wonder if the confection carbon footprint contribution is mostly just due to small unit packaging of
nibbles & less the actual ingredients of Japanese confections .

Anyway, I did get a chuckle out of the report’s concluding section explicitly mentioning that organic produce gives two times the carbon footprint as non-organic produce. I guess the virtue signalling of the “don’t panic, it’s organic” proponents must take a hit for Gaia’s sustainability.

FabioC.
Reply to  gringojay
December 23, 2019 7:51 am

In Japanese shops I have seen vast arrays of sweets, both the traditional ones and western-style. So I suppose somebody will consume them.

December 23, 2019 10:54 am

Appears those that eat high amounts of carbohydrates release more CO2.

Johann Wundersamer
January 2, 2020 1:45 pm

What utter drivel: “Japan’s population is one of the oldest in the world, a trend that many industrial countries are following.”

Japan’s population is one of the oldest in the world, –> Japan’s people is one of the most longevity people in the world,

Johann Wundersamer
January 2, 2020 2:24 pm