Lowering the Environmental Impact of Your Diet Without Going Vegan
- 2 days ago
- 5 min read
This topic is close to my heart. Recently I fell down a rabbit hole with tools like the Water Footprint Calculator and it sparked a bigger question. How much do our food choices really matter for the planet, and where should we focus if we want our efforts to count?
This is not a call to food shame or to go vegan overnight. It is about understanding systems, making informed choices, and taking imperfect action.
🎧 Prefer to listen? We cover this in detail on the How To: Fitness Podcast: Lowering the Environmental Impact of Your Diet Without Going Vegan.
What “environmental impact” actually means
Impact is not a single score. It is a web of effects that add up across a food’s life cycle.
Land use: How much land a food requires, and whether that land replaced forests or other valuable ecosystems.
Water use: How much water is needed, and where that water comes from. Using lots of water in a drought-prone region has a heavier impact than using the same amount in a wetter climate.
Greenhouse gases: Emissions from farming, transport, processing and retail, including methane from ruminant animals and carbon dioxide from energy use.
Biodiversity loss: Habitat conversion and heavy pesticide use reduce the variety of plant and animal life.
Food waste: Most of a food’s footprint is spent before it reaches your fridge. When food is wasted, all those resources are lost.
Thinking in systems helps us avoid simple but misleading rules such as “local is always best” or “plant foods are always perfect”. Context matters.
Myth-busting a few big claims
You have probably seen these statements online. They are catchy, but they miss the nuance.
“Going vegan is the best thing you can do for the planet.” For many people, a more plant-forward pattern is an effective way to reduce impact, yet the biggest wins often come from reducing red meat and food waste, not from strict labels.
“Almond milk is ruining the environment.” Almonds are water-intensive, especially in dry regions, but cow’s milk generally has a much higher overall footprint when you include land, water and methane. Oat and soy milks are often lower still.
“Eating local is always more sustainable.” Transport usually makes up a small slice of a food’s total footprint. A banana shipped efficiently by boat can have a lower carbon footprint than locally raised chicken. Food type often matters more than distance.
BigFoot: which food leaves a bigger mark?
A quick game to show how food types compare.
Beef vs soy: Beef is far higher in emissions and land use. Soy is often blamed for deforestation, yet the majority of soy is grown for animal feed rather than tofu or soy milk.
Almond milk vs cow’s milk: Almonds use lots of water, but cow’s milk is higher on most environmental measures. Oat and soy milks are usually the best choice if you want lower impact.
Local chicken vs imported bananas: Bananas transported by ship typically beat local chicken on carbon footprint. Surprising, yet common once you look at the numbers.
Rice vs potatoes: Rice fields emit methane because of flooded paddies. Potatoes are often lower impact per kilogram.
Chicken vs plant burgers: A plant-based burger has a lower footprint than chicken, and much lower than beef. If you want the burger experience with a lighter footprint, this is a helpful swap.
Meat and dairy, with nuance
This is where things get lopsided. Beef and lamb are the heaviest hitters for emissions and land use, partly due to methane from ruminants and the land required for grazing and feed. Deforestation links are strongest where new pasture or feed crops replace forests.
Dairy sits below beef yet still carries a sizeable footprint because dairy cattle also produce methane and require feed, land and water. As a rough guide, a litre of cow’s milk tends to have a far higher footprint than oat or soy milk. That said, not all systems are equal. Grass-fed beef may support biodiversity in some landscapes, yet it generally still has a high carbon cost per kilogram. More intensive beef can look efficient on emissions per kilogram, yet it raises animal welfare and feed-crop concerns. There is no single perfect method.
If you want a simple rule that works for most people: choose chicken, turkey, eggs or plant proteins more often, and reduce the frequency of beef and lamb. That single change brings outsized benefits without forcing perfection.
Plant milks in brief
Oat milk: Low water use, low emissions, grows well in cooler climates.
Soy milk: Slightly higher emissions than oat, still far lower than dairy, usually higher in protein than other plant milks.
Almond milk: Low emissions but high water use in dry regions. Still tends to beat dairy overall on total footprint. Pick based on your priorities. If you are milk-neutral, oat or soy are easy wins for lower impact. If you love cow’s milk, enjoy it, and look for other places to reduce impact.
Meat substitutes and cultivated meat
Most major plant-based substitutes have a footprint far below beef and lamb and below chicken in many cases. Swapping even one beef burger a week for a plant-based version can add up across a population. Cultivated meat is promising in the long run, although current production is energy intensive. As grids decarbonise, its footprint could fall.
Ultra-processed vs whole foods
We often discuss ultra-processed foods in terms of health. There is also an environmental angle. Multiple processing steps, packaging, refrigeration and long supply chains increase energy use and waste. This does not mean all processing is bad. Tinned tomatoes and frozen veg are brilliant. It simply means that, when practical, choosing foods that need less packaging and processing can lower your footprint over time.
The massive issue of food waste
If you remember one section, make it this. Food waste is responsible for a significant slice of global emissions. In many countries, 30 to 40 percent of food is wasted along the chain from farm to fork. Most of a food’s impact is baked in before it reaches you, so throwing it away multiplies the harm.
Practical ways to cut waste: plan two or three anchor meals, freeze leftovers, rotate the fridge so older items are visible, understand “use by” versus “best before”, and embrace “ugly” fruit and veg. The most sustainable food is the food you actually eat.
Individual choices and systemic change
It is a mistake to pretend your lunch choice will fix climate change. The largest drivers are industrial and policy level. It is also a mistake to believe individuals do not matter. Demand shapes markets. When enough of us choose lower-impact options, businesses invest, access improves, and costs fall. We need both personal action and systemic change, pulling in the same direction.
Actionable ideas that do not require perfection
Reduce red meat a little. Even one or two beef-free meals a week makes a measurable difference.
Choose oat or soy milk when it is easy. Low effort, high impact swap if you are flexible.
Eat more of what you already buy. Freeze, batch cook, and shop your fridge first.
Nudge toward fewer packages. Buy loose or in bulk when you can, use your freezer, and keep convenience for when it truly helps.
Small steps, repeated, change trajectories. Poco a poco.
Listen to the full conversation
We unpack these ideas in a friendly, non-dogmatic way in the podcast. Listen here or watch:
I'm Michael Ulloa and I love to clear up and expose health and fitness myths, where I can. You can follow me on Instagram here or listen to my podcast here.
Alternatively, if you are looking for an online personal trainer you can find out more about what I do here.
Comments