Food production is responsible for one-quarter of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions.
Eating locally would only have a significant impact if transport was responsible for a large share of food’s final carbon footprint. For most foods, this is not the case.
Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from transportation make up a very small amount of the emissions from food, and what you eat is far more important than where your food traveled from.
For most foods — and particularly the largest emitters — most GHG emissions result from land use change (shown in green) and from processes at the farm stage (brown). Farm-stage emissions include processes such as the application of fertilizers — both organic (“manure management”) and synthetic; and enteric fermentation (the production of methane in the stomachs of cattle). Combined, land use and farm-stage emissions account for more than 80% of the footprint for most foods.
Transport is a small contributor to emissions. For most food products, it accounts for less than 10%, and it’s much smaller for the largest GHG emitters. In beef from beef herds, it’s 0.5%.
I’m just spitballing here, but what if….. we all went vegan and stopped having children??
People don't produce all that much CO2, and by stewarding (food) forests and tending gardens they can be part of an ecosystem that absorbs more CO2 than they produce.
If you care enough about the environment to go vegan, you can raise your children to be net positive for the planet.
That does mean destroying capitalism, including most of the automotive industry, agriculture industry, aviation industry, data centers, and more.
But muh Xbox n Mustang n burgers!
The problem is the system, not the head count. As AI and automation advances, the capitalist class will have no problem causing just as much ecological damage with a hundredth of the current population.