Tracking Your Carbon Foodprint

by | Sep 29, 2021 | Clean Water, Climate Change, Healthy Habitat, Local Economies

At the last Harvest Moon Festival in Soldotna, our Local Foods Program hosted a booth, with an interactive component aimed at helping event participants understand the carbon footprint of their […]

At the last Harvest Moon Festival in Soldotna, our Local Foods Program hosted a booth, with an interactive component aimed at helping event participants understand the carbon footprint of their food choices. The carbon footprint of a food, or “foodprint,” is the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions produced throughout its journey from seed to farm, processing to plate, and finally to the landfill or compost bin. At each step along the way, carbon is emitted, with some steps accounting for more than others.

At the Festival, we set up a game with pictures of various foods, like beans, salmon, chicken, vegetables, and cheese, and then asked folks to guess the foodprint of each food.  Almost everyone we interacted with was surprised by the drastic differences in the impacts of foods. In general, food accounts for between 10-30% of a household’s carbon footprint, depending on the types of foods that are consumed (plants tend to have a much lower foodprint than animal-derived foods), as well as where they are sourced from (i.e. grown locally or imported).

Source: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/visualising-the-greenhouse-gas-impact-of-each-food/

Buying locally grown or harvested food helps to protect Alaskan lands from residential or commercial sprawl and, if farmed sustainably, protects vital habitats like salmon streams. It also reduces food miles – the distance food travels. Imported food often travels thousands of miles to get to Alaska and has a larger carbon impact than local foods. On average, locally or regionally sourced produce travels about 27 times less distance than conventionally sourced produce – add in the distance to Alaska and this distance is even bigger. Next time you are enjoying fruit mid-winter, take a moment to think about that banana’s journey to your plate.

It’s important to note that, while buying local has many benefits, like supporting resilient communities through increased food security, in some cases, it may not drastically lower GHG emissions. Beef, for example, carries a large carbon footprint regardless of where it’s grown. By learning more about how your food is produced and where it comes from, we can all make more informed, lower-carbon choices about what we eat.

Thank you for reading. We are able to do this work because of member support from concerned citizens like you. Please donate today to protect Cook Inlet for our future generations.

Similar Posts

The “Big, Beautiful Cook Inlet” (BBC1): March Lease Sales Move Forward without New Environmental Reviews

Instead of conducting updated environmental analysis, on the BBC1 lease sale the administration indicated it would rely on reviews completed in 2017 during the first Trump administration. Inletkeeper has joined with community and environmental groups to formally notify Interior Secretary Doug Burgum of their intent to sue if the sale proceeds without required consultation under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Relying on outdated reports disregards nearly a decade worth of analysis on the accelerating impacts of climate change, increased industrial activity, and updated science on species and habitat conditions.

What’s Next for Planned Offshore Lease Sales in Lower Cook Inlet

Last year, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) prematurely scrapped an offshore management plan that protected Alaskan coastal waters from oil and gas leasing. Now, the agency is planning multiple leases for Lower Cook Inlet in their new 5-year plan. It’s vital that we continue to speak up for our coastal ecosystems, sustainable fisheries, and what’s best for our local economies. Learn what happens next.

We can’t risk turning climate pollution into water pollution

Carbon capture has a host of uncertainties upstream of the injection well. But let’s set aside for now the unsolved technological question of how CO2 can be affordably captured at any significant scale. Likewise the economic and political questions of how to price and/or police carbon to make polluters capture it. What concerns do we have about pumping CO2 underground, and the vigilance needed to be sure it doesn’t harm the people and ecosystems above?