logo
Peanuts or almonds? Rice or millet? Planet-friendly grocery shopping choices go beyond cutting meat

Peanuts or almonds? Rice or millet? Planet-friendly grocery shopping choices go beyond cutting meat

It's one of the most impactful climate decisions we make, and we make it multiple times a day.
The U.N. estimates about a
third
of the world's greenhouse gas emissions, the main driver of climate change, come from food. That pollution can come from several links in the food supply chain: how farmland is treated, how crops are grown, how food is processed and how it's ultimately transported.
Maybe you've already heard the short answer to minimizing your diet's impact on the planet: eat more plants and fewer animals. The data backs up that suggestion. Emissions from meat-rich diets are
four times higher
than that of vegan diets.
But so much focus on meats overshadows many other food choices that also impact the environment and can contribute to global warming. Here is a look at other important grocery store decisions:
Proteins
Swapping one serving of chicken per day for beef cuts a diet's emissions
nearly in half
. Ruminant animals such as cows, sheep and goats are the top drivers of emissions.
Those animals 'are associated not only with nitrous oxide emissions, but they're also related to direct methane emissions because they burp them up while they digest food,' said Marco Springmann, professorial research fellow in climate change, food systems and health at University College London.
Springmann said processed animal products have a higher impact on the planet, too: 'You need 10 times the amount of milk to make one unit of cheese.' So — and this is true of most food groups — the less processed the food, the smaller the environmental impact.
Plant-based proteins like legumes, beans and nuts all boast a much lower climate impact.
Grains
The standout here is rice, and not in a good way.
'Rice uses a ton of water. It uses gobs of fertilizer. There's flooded rice paddy fields, and that water actually breeds all kinds of bacteria, and those bacteria produce methane gas,' said eco-dietitian nutritionist Mary Purdy.
Purdy said the most planet-friendly alternative is just eating a bunch of different grains.
'The wheat, corn and soy world is very, very familiar to us because we've been seeing it. It's been heavily marketed. When was the last time you saw a commercial for millet or buckwheat?' she asked.
Diverse diets, Purdy said, incentivize biodiverse agriculture, which is more resilient to erratic weather — a hallmark of climate change — and makes healthier soil.
Fruits and vegetables
When it comes to produce, minimizing impact is less about choosing between foods and more about buying based on the way that food was grown.
Conventionally grown produce 'very likely is using pesticides, fertilizer, and maybe more water because the soil isn't healthy,' said Purdy.
Purdy said organic labels, such as
Regenerative Organic Certified
, indicate those foods had a smaller climate impact when they were grown. The tradeoff is that organic food has a lower yield, so it requires more land use and is often more expensive.
Local and 'in season' foods also have a smaller climate impact, but not just for one of the reasons you may be thinking of: emissions from international shipping. Every day, thousands of large ships transport goods, including produce, around the world, and the fuel they use is heavily polluting.
However, 'it's mostly those local emissions on trucks that are actually impactful, not the international shipping emissions,' Springmann said.
Also, food grown nearby tends to be grown in a way that fits with the local climate and is less harmful to the environment.
'We're not trying to grow oranges in some place in a greenhouse,' Purdy said.
Butter and oil
Plants win out over animals, again. Vegetable oils are less impactful than butter or lard. Springmann also said tropical oils are healthiest in moderation, such as those from coconuts or palms, because they have a higher fat content. Plus, palm oil is associated
with deforestation
.
As for nut butters, almonds might be a great option for limiting carbon emissions, but they require a lot of water.
One study
out of Tulane University found that a serving of peanuts has an emissions footprint similar to almonds but 30% less impact on water use.
Don't waste food
Throwing less food away might sound obvious, but roughly
a third
of food grown in the U.S. is wasted.
Meal planning, freezing leftovers and checking the fridge before heading to the grocery store all help cut waste.
'The climate impact, the embedded water use, all of the labor and different aspects that went into producing that food, that all gets wasted if we don't eat it,' Blackstone said.
___
The Associated Press' climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's
standards
for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
AP.org
.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Peanuts or almonds? Rice or millet? Planet-friendly grocery shopping choices go beyond cutting meat
Peanuts or almonds? Rice or millet? Planet-friendly grocery shopping choices go beyond cutting meat

The Hill

timea day ago

  • The Hill

Peanuts or almonds? Rice or millet? Planet-friendly grocery shopping choices go beyond cutting meat

It's one of the most impactful climate decisions we make, and we make it multiple times a day. The U.N. estimates about a third of the world's greenhouse gas emissions, the main driver of climate change, come from food. That pollution can come from several links in the food supply chain: how farmland is treated, how crops are grown, how food is processed and how it's ultimately transported. Maybe you've already heard the short answer to minimizing your diet's impact on the planet: eat more plants and fewer animals. The data backs up that suggestion. Emissions from meat-rich diets are four times higher than that of vegan diets. But so much focus on meats overshadows many other food choices that also impact the environment and can contribute to global warming. Here is a look at other important grocery store decisions: Swapping one serving of chicken per day for beef cuts a diet's emissions nearly in half. Ruminant animals such as cows, sheep and goats are the top drivers of emissions. Those animals 'are associated not only with nitrous oxide emissions, but they're also related to direct methane emissions because they burp them up while they digest food,' said Marco Springmann, professorial research fellow in climate change, food systems and health at University College London. Springmann said processed animal products have a higher impact on the planet, too: 'You need 10 times the amount of milk to make one unit of cheese.' So — and this is true of most food groups — the less processed the food, the smaller the environmental impact. Plant-based proteins like legumes, beans and nuts all boast a much lower climate impact. The standout here is rice, and not in a good way. 'Rice uses a ton of water. It uses gobs of fertilizer. There's flooded rice paddy fields, and that water actually breeds all kinds of bacteria, and those bacteria produce methane gas,' said eco-dietitian nutritionist Mary Purdy. Purdy said the most planet-friendly alternative is just eating a bunch of different grains. 'The wheat, corn and soy world is very, very familiar to us because we've been seeing it. It's been heavily marketed. When was the last time you saw a commercial for millet or buckwheat?' she asked. Diverse diets, Purdy said, incentivize biodiverse agriculture, which is more resilient to erratic weather — a hallmark of climate change — and makes healthier soil. When it comes to produce, minimizing impact is less about choosing between foods and more about buying based on the way that food was grown. Conventionally grown produce 'very likely is using pesticides, fertilizer, and maybe more water because the soil isn't healthy,' said Purdy. Purdy said organic labels, such as Regenerative Organic Certified, indicate those foods had a smaller climate impact when they were grown. The tradeoff is that organic food has a lower yield, so it requires more land use and is often more expensive. Local and 'in season' foods also have a smaller climate impact, but not just for one of the reasons you may be thinking of: emissions from international shipping. Every day, thousands of large ships transport goods, including produce, around the world, and the fuel they use is heavily polluting. However, 'it's mostly those local emissions on trucks that are actually impactful, not the international shipping emissions,' Springmann said. Also, food grown nearby tends to be grown in a way that fits with the local climate and is less harmful to the environment. 'We're not trying to grow oranges in some place in a greenhouse,' Purdy said. Plants win out over animals, again. Vegetable oils are less impactful than butter or lard. Springmann also said tropical oils are healthiest in moderation, such as those from coconuts or palms, because they have a higher fat content. Plus, palm oil is associated with deforestation. As for nut butters, almonds might be a great option for limiting carbon emissions, but they require a lot of water. One study out of Tulane University found that a serving of peanuts has an emissions footprint similar to almonds but 30% less impact on water use. Throwing less food away might sound obvious, but roughly a third of food grown in the U.S. is wasted. Meal planning, freezing leftovers and checking the fridge before heading to the grocery store all help cut waste. 'The climate impact, the embedded water use, all of the labor and different aspects that went into producing that food, that all gets wasted if we don't eat it,' Nicole Tichenor Blackstone, a professor at the Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy at Tufts University. ___ The Associated Press' climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at

More than 55,000 Palestinians have been killed in the Israel-Hamas war, Gaza health officials say
More than 55,000 Palestinians have been killed in the Israel-Hamas war, Gaza health officials say

Washington Post

timea day ago

  • Washington Post

More than 55,000 Palestinians have been killed in the Israel-Hamas war, Gaza health officials say

DEIR AL-BALAH, Gaza Strip — The Palestinian death toll from the 20-month Israel-Hamas war has climbed past 55,000, the Gaza Health Ministry said Wednesday. The ministry doesn't distinguish between civilians and combatants, but has said that women and children make up more than half the dead. It's a grim milestone in the war that began with Hamas' attack into southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, and shows no sign of ending. Israel says it only targets militants and blames civilian deaths on Hamas, accusing the militants of hiding among civilians, because they operate in populated areas. The ministry says 55,104 people have been killed since the start of the war and 127,394 wounded. Many more are believed to be buried under the rubble or in areas that are inaccessible to local medics. The Health Ministry is part of Gaza's Hamas-run government, but staffed by medical professionals who maintain and publish detailed records. Its tolls from previous conflicts have largely aligned with those of independent experts, though Israel has questioned the ministry's figures. Israeli forces have destroyed vast areas of Gaza , displaced about 90% of its population and in recent weeks have transformed more than half of the coastal territory into a military buffer zone that includes the now mostly uninhabited southern city of Rafah. A 2½-month blockade imposed by Israel when it ended a ceasefire with Hamas raised fears of famine and was slightly eased in May. The launch of a new Israeli- and U.S.-backed aid system has been marred by chaos and violence , and the U.N. says it has struggled to bring in food because of Israeli restrictions, a breakdown of law and order, and widespread looting. Israel accuses Hamas of siphoning off aid, but the U.N. and aid groups deny there is any systematic diversion of aid to militants. Hamas has suffered major setbacks militarily, and Israel says it has killed more than 20,000 militants, without providing evidence. The militants still hold 55 hostages — less than half of them believed to be alive — and control areas outside of military zones despite facing rare protests earlier this year. The war began when Hamas-led militants killed around 1,200 people, mostly civilians, in the Oct. 7 attack and abducted 251 hostages. More than half the captives have been released in ceasefires or other deals. Israeli forces have rescued eight and recovered the remains of dozens more. Israel's military campaign, one of the deadliest and most destructive since World War II, has transformed large parts of cities into mounds of rubble . Hundreds of thousands of people are living in squalid tent camps and unused schools, and the health system has been gutted, even as it copes with waves of wounded from Israeli strikes . Hamas has said it will only release the remaining hostages in return for more Palestinian prisoners, a lasting ceasefire and a complete Israeli withdrawal. It has offered to hand over power to a politically independent Palestinian committee. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has rejected those terms, saying that Israel will only agree to temporary ceasefires to facilitate the return of hostages. He has vowed to continue the war until all the hostages are returned and Hamas is defeated or disarmed and sent into exile. Netanyahu says Israel will control Gaza indefinitely and facilitate what he refers to as the voluntary emigration of much of its population to other countries. The Palestinians and most of the international community reject such plans, viewing them as forcible expulsion that could violate international law . ___ Fatma Khaled reported from Cairo. ___ Follow AP's war coverage at

Peanuts or almonds? Rice or millet? Planet-friendly grocery shopping choices go beyond cutting meat
Peanuts or almonds? Rice or millet? Planet-friendly grocery shopping choices go beyond cutting meat

Yahoo

timea day ago

  • Yahoo

Peanuts or almonds? Rice or millet? Planet-friendly grocery shopping choices go beyond cutting meat

It's one of the most impactful climate decisions we make, and we make it multiple times a day. The U.N. estimates about a third of the world's greenhouse gas emissions, the main driver of climate change, come from food. That pollution can come from several links in the food supply chain: how farmland is treated, how crops are grown, how food is processed and how it's ultimately transported. Maybe you've already heard the short answer to minimizing your diet's impact on the planet: eat more plants and fewer animals. The data backs up that suggestion. Emissions from meat-rich diets are four times higher than that of vegan diets. But so much focus on meats overshadows many other food choices that also impact the environment and can contribute to global warming. Here is a look at other important grocery store decisions: Proteins Swapping one serving of chicken per day for beef cuts a diet's emissions nearly in half. Ruminant animals such as cows, sheep and goats are the top drivers of emissions. Those animals "are associated not only with nitrous oxide emissions, but they're also related to direct methane emissions because they burp them up while they digest food,' said Marco Springmann, professorial research fellow in climate change, food systems and health at University College London. Springmann said processed animal products have a higher impact on the planet, too: 'You need 10 times the amount of milk to make one unit of cheese.' So — and this is true of most food groups — the less processed the food, the smaller the environmental impact. Plant-based proteins like legumes, beans and nuts all boast a much lower climate impact. Grains The standout here is rice, and not in a good way. 'Rice uses a ton of water. It uses gobs of fertilizer. There's flooded rice paddy fields, and that water actually breeds all kinds of bacteria, and those bacteria produce methane gas,' said eco-dietitian nutritionist Mary Purdy. Purdy said the most planet-friendly alternative is just eating a bunch of different grains. 'The wheat, corn and soy world is very, very familiar to us because we've been seeing it. It's been heavily marketed. When was the last time you saw a commercial for millet or buckwheat?" she asked. Diverse diets, Purdy said, incentivize biodiverse agriculture, which is more resilient to erratic weather — a hallmark of climate change — and makes healthier soil. Fruits and vegetables When it comes to produce, minimizing impact is less about choosing between foods and more about buying based on the way that food was grown. Conventionally grown produce 'very likely is using pesticides, fertilizer, and maybe more water because the soil isn't healthy,' said Purdy. Purdy said organic labels, such as Regenerative Organic Certified, indicate those foods had a smaller climate impact when they were grown. The tradeoff is that organic food has a lower yield, so it requires more land use and is often more expensive. Local and 'in season' foods also have a smaller climate impact, but not just for one of the reasons you may be thinking of: emissions from international shipping. Every day, thousands of large ships transport goods, including produce, around the world, and the fuel they use is heavily polluting. However, "it's mostly those local emissions on trucks that are actually impactful, not the international shipping emissions," Springmann said. Also, food grown nearby tends to be grown in a way that fits with the local climate and is less harmful to the environment. "We're not trying to grow oranges in some place in a greenhouse,' Purdy said. Butter and oil Plants win out over animals, again. Vegetable oils are less impactful than butter or lard. Springmann also said tropical oils are healthiest in moderation, such as those from coconuts or palms, because they have a higher fat content. Plus, palm oil is associated with deforestation. As for nut butters, almonds might be a great option for limiting carbon emissions, but they require a lot of water. One study out of Tulane University found that a serving of peanuts has an emissions footprint similar to almonds but 30% less impact on water use. Don't waste food Throwing less food away might sound obvious, but roughly a third of food grown in the U.S. is wasted. Meal planning, freezing leftovers and checking the fridge before heading to the grocery store all help cut waste. 'The climate impact, the embedded water use, all of the labor and different aspects that went into producing that food, that all gets wasted if we don't eat it,' Blackstone said. ___ The Associated Press' climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store