Connect with us

Published

on

Choosing the “least expensive” healthy food options could cut dietary emissions by one-third, according to a new study.

In addition to the lower emissions, diets composed of low-cost, healthy foods would cost roughly one-third as much as a diet of the most-consumed foods in every country.

The study, published in Nature Food, compares prices and emissions associated with 440 local food products in 171 countries.

The researchers identify some food groups that are low in both cost and emissions, including legumes, nuts and seeds, as well as oils and fats.

Some of the most widely consumed foods – such as wheat, maize, white beans, apples, onions, carrots and small fish – also fall into this category, the study says.

One of the lead authors tells Carbon Brief that while food marketing has promoted the idea that eating environmentally friendly diets is “very fancy and expensive”, the study shows that such diets are achievable through cheap, everyday foods.

Meanwhile, a separate Nature Food study found that reforming the policies that reduce taxes on meat products in the EU could decrease food-related emissions by up to 5.7%.

Costs and emissions

The study defines a healthy diet using the “healthy diet basket” (HDB), which is a standard based on nutritional guidelines that includes a range of food groups with the needed nutrients to provide long-term health.

Using both data on locally available products and food-specific emissions databases, the authors estimate the costs and greenhouse gas emissions of 440 food products needed for healthy diets in 171 countries.

They examine three different healthy diets: one using the most-consumed food products, one using the least expensive food products and one using the lowest-emitting food products.

Each of these diets is constructed for each country, based on costs, emissions, availability and consumption patterns.

The researchers find that a healthy diet comprising the most-consumed foods within each country – such as beef, chicken, pork, milk, rice and tomatoes – emits an average of 2.44 kilograms of CO2-equivalent (kgCO2e) and costs $9.96 (£7.24) in 2021 prices, per person and per day.

However, they find that a healthy diet with the least-expensive locally available foods in each country – such as bananas, carrots, small fish, eggs, lentils, chicken and cassava – emits 1.65kgCO2e and costs $3.68 (£2.68). That is approximately one-third of the emissions and one-third of the cost of the most-consumed products diet.

In comparison, a healthy diet with the lowest-emissions products – such as oats, tuna, sardines and apples – would emit just 0.67kgCO2e, but would cost nearly double the least-expensive diet, at $6.95 (£5.05).

This reveals the tradeoffs of affordability and sustainability – and shows that the least-expensive foods tend to produce lower emissions, according to the study.

Dr Elena Martínez, a food-systems researcher at Tufts University and one of the lead authors of the study, tells Carbon Brief this is generally true because lower-cost food production tends to use fewer fossil fuels and require less land-use change, which also cuts emissions.

Ignacio Drake is coordinator of the fiscal and economic policies at Colansa, an organisation promoting healthy eating and sustainable food systems in Latin America and the Caribbean.

Drake, who was not involved in the study, tells Carbon Brief that the research is a “step further” than previous work on healthy diets. He adds that the study “integrates and consolidates” previous analyses done by other groups, such as the World Bank and the UN Food and Agriculture Organization.

Food group differences

The research looks at six food groups: animal-sourced foods, oils and fats, fruits, legumes (as well as nuts and seeds), vegetables and starchy staples.

Animal-sourced foods – such as meat and dairy – are typically the most-emitting, and most-expensive, food group.

Within this group, the study finds that beef has the highest costs and emissions, while small fish, such as sardines, have the lowest emissions. Milk and poultry are amongst the least-expensive products for a healthy diet.

Starchy staple products also contribute to high emissions too, adds the study, because they make up such a large portion of most people’s calories.

Emissions from fruits, vegetables, legumes and oil are lower than those from animal-derived foods.

The following chart shows the energy contributions (top) and related emissions (bottom) from six major food groups in the three diets modelled by the study: lowest-cost (left), lowest-emission (middle) and most-common (right) food items.

The six food groups examined in the study are shown in different colours: animal-sourced foods (red), legumes, nuts and seeds (blue), oils and fats (purple), vegetables (green), fruits (orange) and starchy staples (yellow). The size of each box represents the contribution of that food to the overall dietary energy (top) and greenhouse gas emissions (bottom) of each diet.

Energy (top) and emissions (bottom) contributions from different food groups within the three diets modelled by the study.
Energy (top) and emissions (bottom) contributions from different food groups within the three diets modelled by the study. Each column represents a different diet (left to right): lowest-cost, lowest-emission and most common items. The boxes are coloured by food group: animal-sourced foods (red), legumes, nuts and seeds (blue), oils and fats (purple), vegetables (green), fruits (orange) and starchy staples (yellow). Source: Bai et al. (2025).

Prof William Masters, a professor at Tufts University and author on the study, tells Carbon Brief that balancing food groups is important for human health and the environment, but local context is also important. For example, he points out that in low-income countries, some people do not get enough animal-sourced foods.

For Drake, if there are foods with the same nutritional quality, but that are cheaper and produce fewer emissions, it is logical to think that the “cost-benefit ratio [of switching] is clear”.

Other studies and reports have also modelled healthy and sustainable diets and, although they do not exclude animal-sourced foods, they do limit their consumption.

A recent study estimated that a global food system transformation – including a diet known as the “planetary health diet”, based on cutting meat, dairy and sugar and increasing plant-based foods, along with other actions – can help limit global temperature rise to 1.85C by 2050.

The latest EAT-Lancet Commission report found that a global shift to healthier diets could cut non-CO2 emissions from agriculture, such as methane and nitrous oxide, by 15%. The report recommends increasing the production of fruit, vegetable and nuts by two-thirds, while reducing livestock meat production by one-third.

Dr Sonia Rodríguez, head of the department of food, culture and environment at Mexico’s National Institute of Public Health, says that unlike earlier studies, which project ideal scenarios, this new study also evaluates real scenarios and provides a “global view” of the costs and emissions of diets in various countries.

Increasing access

The study points out that as people’s incomes increase, their consumption of expensive foods also increases. However, it adds, some people with high income that can afford healthy diets often consume other types of foods, due to reasons such as preferences, time and cooking costs.

The study stresses that nearly one-third of the world’s population – about 2.6 billion people – cannot afford sufficient food products required for a healthy diet.

In low-income countries, primarily in sub-Saharan Africa and south Asia, 75% of the population cannot afford a healthy diet, says the study.

In middle-income countries, such as China, Brazil, Mexico and Russia, more than half of the population can afford such a diet.

To improve the consumption of healthy, sustainable and affordable foods, the authors recommend changes in food policy, increasing the availability of food at the local level and substituting highly emitting products.

Martínez also suggests implementing labelling systems with information on the environmental footprint and nutritional quality of foods. She adds:

“We need strategies beyond just reducing the cost of diets to get people to eat climate-friendly foods.”

Drake notes that there are public and financial policies that can help reduce the consumption of unhealthy and unsustainable foods, such as taxes on unhealthy foods and sugary drinks. This, he adds, would lead to better health outcomes for countries and free up public resources for implementing other policies, such as subsidies for producing healthy food.

Separately, another recent Nature Food study looks at taxes specifically on meat products, which are subject to reduced value-added tax (VAT) in 22 EU member states.

It finds that taxing meat at the standard VAT rate could decrease dietary-related greenhouse gases by 3.5-5.7%. Such a levy would also have positive outcomes for water and land use, as well as biodiversity loss, according to the study.

The post Adopting low-cost ‘healthy’ diets could cut food emissions by one-third appeared first on Carbon Brief.

Adopting low-cost ‘healthy’ diets could cut food emissions by one-third

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Why Beaches Are Swamped With Sargassum, the Stinky Seaweed Menace

Published

on

It smells like rotten eggs, releases toxic gases, endangers sea life and scuttles vacations. Scientists, startups and communities are trying to figure out what to do with it all.

From our collaborating partner Living on Earth, public radio’s environmental news magazine, an interview by Aynsley O’Neill with Inside Climate News’ Teresa Tomassoni.

Why Beaches Are Swamped With Sargassum, the Stinky Seaweed Menace

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Why women’s leadership is central to unlocking the global phaseout of fossil fuels

Published

on

Osprey Orielle Lake is founder and executive director of The Women’s Earth and Climate Action Network (WECAN) and a steering committee member of the Fossil Fuel Treaty.

Around the world, women are leading some of the most powerful efforts to stop fossil fuel expansion and implement the just transition the climate crisis demands.

In the Ecuadorian Amazon, Nemonte Nenquimo, an Indigenous Waorani woman, led a successful lawsuit for the Waorani against the Ecuadorian government to protect their territory and the Amazonian rainforest from oil extraction. Ecuador’s courts ruled in favor of the Waorani, setting a legal precedent for Indigenous rights and prompting similar legal fights worldwide.

In the heart of Cancer Alley in the Gulf South of the United States, Sharon Lavigne, founder of Rise St. James, took on fossil fuel polluters and won. After stopping a Formosa petrochemical facility in her parish, she continues to organize communities to stop fossil fuels, bringing awareness to the severe health impacts caused by the industry.

An initial cornerstone for an upcoming government convening on fossil fuel phaseout is the Fossil Fuel Treaty, which was founded by Tzeporah Burman. She won the 2019 Climate Breakthrough Award for her bold Treaty vision, which has now taken center stage in international climate action.

These women are not anomalies, they are part of a broader movement. Women the world over are stopping harmful projects and building regenerative futures. They are defending land, water, climate, and health. They are redefining what leadership looks like in a time of crisis.

    Research has found that countries with higher representation of women in parliament are more likely to ratify environmental treaties. One prominent cross-national study found that CO2 emissions decrease by approximately 11.51 percent in response to a one-unit increase in each countries’ scoring on the Women’s Political Empowerment Index. When women are incorporated into disaster planning or forest management, projects are more resilient and effective.

    Yet because of persistent gender inequality, women – particularly Indigenous, Black and Brown women and women in low-income and frontline communities – are often disproportionately harmed by fossil fuel extraction and pollution. At the same time, they are also indispensable leaders of equitable solutions.

    Bold, transformative solutions needed

    Although the climate crisis may not be in the headlines recently, the crisis is increasing at lightening speed. From 2023 to 2025, the world crossed a dangerous threshold, marking the first three-year global average that exceeded the crucial 1.5°C guardrail, the very limit scientists identified as critical to avoid the worst catastrophic tipping points.

    This is not a eulogy for 1.5°C, but an alarm about a narrowing window. The data makes clear that we still have an opportunity to hold long-term warming below that life-affirming threshold. What is required now is not incrementalism and business as usual but bold and transformative solutions from grassroots movements to the halls of government.

    A woman looks at a solar panel, at a factory called Ener-G-Africa, where high-quality solar panels made by an all-women team are produced, in Cape Town, South Africa, February 9, 2023. (Photo: REUTERS/Esa Alexander)

    A woman looks at a solar panel, at a factory called Ener-G-Africa, where high-quality solar panels made by an all-women team are produced, in Cape Town, South Africa, February 9, 2023. (Photo: REUTERS/Esa Alexander)

    At the top of the list in tackling the climate crisis is the urgent need for a global phaseout of fossil fuel extraction and production. Coal, oil, and gas remain the primary driver of the climate crisis, and fossil fuel pollution is responsible for one in five deaths worldwide. The simple but challenging fact is, there is no way forward without a phaseout.

    In 2023, at the U.N. Climate Summit in Dubai (COP28), governments agreed for the first time to “transition away from fossil fuels.” The language was historic but nonbinding, and implementation has been severely hindered. Most governments are doubling down and increasing production across coal, gas, and oil. At COP30 in Brazil, while 80 countries called for fossil fuel language in the final outcome text, governments ultimately left without any commitments to a phaseout.

    Women’s assembly for fossil fuel phaseout

    In response to this stalled progress, Colombia and the Netherlands are convening the First Conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels, bringing together governments committed to advancing cooperation toward a managed, equitable phaseout. Occurring outside the formal UN climate negotiations, the gathering reflects a growing recognition that progress often requires voluntary alliances of ambitious nations.

    The urgency of this moment demands more than policy tweaks. It calls for a restructuring of the systems that fueled the crisis such as economic models that externalize harm, energy systems that prioritize profit over people, and governance structures that marginalize frontline communities. How we navigate this transition will shape the world our children inherit, and evidence shows that women’s leadership is vital to ensure a healthy and equitable outcome.

    Colombia aims to launch fossil fuel transition platform at first global conference

    As governments, civil society and global advocates prepare for the conference in Colombia, women’s leadership must not be an afterthought. It needs to be central to the agenda, inspired by equity, justice and care.

    That is why the Women’s Earth and Climate Action Network is convening global women leaders to advance strategies, proposals, and projects at the public Women’s Assembly for a Just Fossil Fuel Phaseout to be held virtually on March 31 to call for transformative action in Colombia. All are welcome.

    A livable future depends on bold action now, and on women leading the way at this critical moment.

    The post Why women’s leadership is central to unlocking the global phaseout of fossil fuels appeared first on Climate Home News.

    Why women’s leadership is central to unlocking the global phaseout of fossil fuels

    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

    On the Farm, the Hidden Climate Cost of America’s Broken Health Care System

    Published

    on

    American farmers are drowning in health insurance costs, while their German counterparts never worry about medical bills. The difference may help determine which country’s small farms are better prepared for a changing climate.

    Samantha Kemnah looked out the foggy window of her home in New Berlin, New York, at the 150-acre dairy farm she and her husband, Chris, bought last year. This winter, an unprecedented cold front brought snowstorms and ice to the region.

    On the Farm, the Hidden Climate Cost of the Broken U.S. Health Care System

    Continue Reading

    Trending

    Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com