No, Lettuce Is Not Worse For The Environment Than Bacon

It was determined that foods which are considered the most healthy and nutritious often result in excessive damage to the environment.

The provocative media headline stating that lettuce is worse than bacon got readers' attention, but even those involved in the study, which measured "resources per calorie", had to point out that while growing some fruits and vegetables requires substantial amounts of water and resources, most have a far lower ranking than pork, for example, when it comes to greenhouse-gas emissions.

On the other hand, the findings of the study have been supported by Tamar Haspel, the author of Washington Post's Unearthed column, who has recently expressed the opinion that lettuce demands a huge amount of resources, although it has little nutritional value.

"What is good for us health-wise isn't always what's best for the environment", she said.

The research looked at the amount of energy consumed to grow, process and transport food to the consumer, as well as energy used in storage at the markets and the home, and took into account water use and GHG emissions also.

The researchers in part relied on data created by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in measuring the levels of calories individuals require to achieve average weight, and this is what is most suitable for most American adults. "Fruit and vegetables have (generally) low calories, and the analysis, rightfully so, is based on resources per calorie of food energy".

Apparently, lettuce is a particularly bad offender because it is an incredibly water and energy intensive food to produce.

"Eating lettuce is over three times worse in greenhouse gas emissions than eating bacon", said Fischbeck when comparing it to the production of 1,000 calories from other foods. The second did not reduce calories but looked at people whose diets reflected the 2010 USDA Dietary Guidelines (i.e., eating lots of fruits and vegetables and lean meats and fish).

"There's a complex relationship between diet and the environment", Tom said. In meats, beef produced more emissions than lettuce this was followed by lamb then pork and then chicken.

In conclusion, if you want to save the environment don't throw the lettuce for the pork but the other way around.

So what does an environmentally-sound, nuanced diet look like? Because red meat consumption is expected to rise significantly by 2050, reversing the trend would have a tremendous impact on greenhouse gas emissions, a 2014 study published in Nature concluded. Sorry to break it to you, meat enthusiasts, but bacon isn't necessarily better for the environment than lettuce. As important as agriculture and consumption are to enviro conservation, however, our biggest problem is reducing our reliance on fossil fuel, many climate scientists say.