Researchers have highlighted the significant impact of meat consumption on greenhouse gas emissions in the United States. A recent study published in the journal Nature Climate Change estimates that meat consumption in U.S. cities generates approximately 329 million tons of carbon emissions annually. This figure is comparable to the emissions from domestic fossil fuel combustion, which stands at about 334 million tons per year.

The study, led by Benjamin P. Goldstein, an assistant professor of environment and sustainability at the University of Michigan, indicates that the emissions from U.S. meat consumption surpass the total annual carbon emissions of the United Kingdom and Italy. The three largest U.S. cities—New York City, Los Angeles, and Chicago—account for a combined total of 3.2 million tons of meat consumed each year.

Goldstein explained that while meat and dairy are known contributors to urban greenhouse gas emissions, tracking their impacts has been challenging. This difficulty arises from the complexity of agricultural supply chains that span large rural areas. Traditional accounting methods often rely on national averages, which can obscure significant regional differences.

To address this, researchers mapped the greenhouse gas emissions associated with beef, chicken, and pork consumption across 3,531 U.S. cities. They utilized a high-resolution model to connect meat consumption to the specific rural regions that produce the feed and livestock. The study found that Americans consume 4.6 million tons of chicken, 3.7 million tons of beef, and 2.7 million tons of pork each year.

The carbon footprint of meat consumption varies based on production locations. For example, Los Angeles sources beef from 10 counties, which in turn rely on livestock from 469 counties, fed by crops grown in 828 counties. Goldstein noted that urban sustainability efforts have primarily focused on buildings and infrastructure, often overlooking the environmental impacts of food supply chains.

The researchers suggest that emissions from meat consumption could be reduced by up to 51% through strategies such as minimizing food waste and shifting dietary preferences from beef to poultry. They emphasized the importance of linking data from the U.S. Agricultural Census, which includes information on food production at the county level, to better understand the environmental impacts of meat supply chains.

Goldstein stated, "It shows how urban and rural livelihoods are highly interdependent. We need food in cities. Obviously, it’s mainly grown elsewhere." He also highlighted that integrating trees into livestock grazing systems could further reduce the carbon footprint of meat production.

For individuals, the researchers recommend adopting a plant-based diet and choosing chicken or pork over beef as effective ways to practice sustainability. Goldstein concluded, "Thinking about what we have to change is not necessarily how we produce things or the distance and the food miles that travels, but really what we put into our bodies."