Government report recommends overhaul of land use and huge reductions in CO2 emission
The Department for Energy and Climate Change have published a report on their Global Calculator, a model which sets out what the ‘average lifestyle’ would need to be to meet climate change targets in 2050.
The project was based on a question:
“Is it physically possible to meet our climate targets and ensure everyone has good living standards by 2050?”
This is defined as all ten billion people in the world eating well, travelling more and living in more comfortable homes, whilst simultaneously ‘reducing emissions to a level consistent with a 50 per cent chance of 2°C warming’.
If this is to be achieved, the report says, the amount of CO2 emitted globally per unit of electricity needs to fall by at least 90 per cent by 2050. The proportion of people who heat their homes using other sources – electric or zero carbon – should rise to 25 to 50 per cent globally by 2050.
It was calculated that fossil fuel use must fall from being 82 per cent of our primary energy supply today to 40 per cent by 2050, with a sharp fall in coal demand required.
As well as transforming technology, there needs to be a change in how we use land resources, which will have a significant impact on people’s diets. In particular, the report concludes, we must make use of forests as a valuable carbon sink, and protect and expand them globally by five to 15 per cent.
In conjunction with this, the report recommends that people change their eating habits in order to maximise the land area required to produce food. It says that switching from beef consumption towards pork, poultry, vegetables and grains will significantly improve land use:
“Currently an area the size of a football pitch can be used to produce 250kg of beef, 1,000kg of poultry (both fed on grains and residues) or 15,000 of fruit and vegetables.
“In 2050, if everyone switched to the healthy diet as recommended by the World Health Organisation (2,100 calories on average, of which 160 calories is meat), this could save up to 15 GtCO2e in 205011 as the freed up land is used for forest or bioenergy.”
This would entail a big overhaul of lifestyle for many people, and worrying changes for farmers. It is for this reason that the report emphasises the importance of strong leadership from businesses, civil society and politicians, in the run up to the UN convention in December of this year.
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers and to make the biggest impact we can in the next general election, we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That's why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward's work.
We still need another 124 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
26 Responses to “Diet is crucial in the fight to meet climate change targets”
Leon Wolfeson
Then I’d be focusing on synthetic meat research, if I were you. Oh, and pushing nuclear power.
Guest
No surprise you take every chance to lash out at the Other
ReduceGHGs
Your source did NOT confirm that eating cows is carbon neutral and that’s because it isn’t. It said…
“”…the combustion of biofuels is considered “carbon neutral.”””
I recommend some research. The following statement I provided earlier is well known.
“The environmental impact of the lifecycle and supply chain of animals raised for food has been vastly underestimated, and in fact accounts for at least half of all human-caused greenhouse gases.”
And the following is on my website (Responsibility page) with a link to the source.
“According to the Environmental Working Group (EWG), the production, processing and distribution of meat requires huge outlays of pesticides, fertilizer, fuel, feed and water while releasing greenhouse gases, manure and a range of toxic chemicals into our air and water. A life-cycle analysis conducted by EWG that took into account the production and distribution of 20 common agricultural products found that red meat such as beef and lamb is responsible for 10 to 40 times as many greenhouse gas emissions as common vegetables and grains.”
Enjoy learning.
ExhaustingHabitability(dot)org
damon
Only in your febrile imagination Leon.
Why shouldn’t people in poor countries have what we have in the developed West?
You seem to argue on the one hand that a country like Britain should be able to take millions of poor immigrants who want a more consumerist lifestyle, and then we’re told that actually we should actually be living like frugal peasants to save the planet.
I told you already, my favourite people on earth are Sri Lankans – I’m actually in a Tamil town right now.
Lovely people, but their infrastructure is very poor. And their buses, old and dangerous.
I just took a 100km ride on one this morning, and people deserve better.
This country should be as developed as California.
zlop
By killing cows and planting a tree, yes, we can slow the climate.
“Climate Change and How to Slow It Down – Marius Vaitkevičius”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ys4ycSfr2S8