Alternative Proteins May Be Our Best Bet to Curb Food Emissions

To avoid the grimmest possible predictions for climate change, the world must rapidly cut back on how much meat — especially beef — we eat. A new study published in Scientific Reports finds that replacing meat and dairy with climate-friendlier alternatives, such as plant-based proteins and cultivated meat, could significantly reduce food-related greenhouse gas emissions. But the window to act is narrowing fast. Delays, researchers say, could require a much more drastic overhaul of diets by 2050.

In a paper published on July 2, researchers from the University of California, Santa Cruz and the consulting firm Accenture suggested that to keep the food system from wrecking the planet, 60 percent of animal-based foods would need to be swapped for plant-based or cultivated alternatives by 2050 — but only if the transition towards a more plant-forward food system began before 2023.

Other researchers have pointed to a more moderate approach to stay within climate limits, such as reducing beef consumption to no more than one beef burger and a half per week in the Global North, for example. But the research suggesting the more moderate approach is now several years old, and researchers assumed some progress on dietary change that we have yet to see in most countries that eat lots of meat.

The Food System’s Ticking Carbon Budget

The food system accounts for roughly one-third of the global greenhouse gas emissions. Most of these come from methane released by cattle, nitrous oxide from fertilizers, carbon dioxide from deforestation and other sources like manure management and rice farming. Livestock grazing is also a major driver of deforestation.

Under a business-as-usual scenario — where global diets continue shifting toward an meat-heavy Western diet averaging 3,220 kilocalories (kcal) per person a day — cumulative food system emissions are projected to reach 607 gigatons of CO₂ equivalent (GTCO₂e), according to the study. To keep warming below 1.5°C and prevent the catastrophic impacts of climate change, the food system must stay within a carbon budget — essentially a climate spending limit — of 390 GTCO₂e through 2050, with climate models reaching net zero at that point.

But the world is already on track to breach the 1.5 degrees Celsius warming limit set by the Paris Climate Agreement in 2015. A new analysis from the World Meteorological Association projected a 70 percent chance that the average global temperature from 2025 to 2029 will surpass the 1.5°C threshold.

According to the new Scientific Reports study, if the world continues to put off progress on dietary change until 2026, 100 percent of meat and dairy products would need to be replaced by mid-century to stay within the food system’s climate limits — a far more radical shift.

“For the food system to stay within a reasonable carbon budget, we need to do the replacement as fast as possible because it takes time for consumers to start accepting a new product,” Galina Hale, one of the authors of the study, tells Sentient. She adds: “We are on a very tight schedule.”

The study did not forecast the likelihood of such dietary transitions but, for Zak Weston, a consultant on alternative proteins and former employee of the Good Food Institute, the world is not on track to meet either scenario. If it were, we’d already see greater investment, stronger government support and rising consumer demand for meat alternatives. “We’ve seen limited progress in each of these areas, but it’s not happening fast enough,” Weston told Sentient in an email.

Emily Cassidy, who studies climate solutions in the food system at the climate nonprofit Project Drawdown, says that shifting away from meat and dairy is an effective way to cut emissions quickly. She calls it an “emergency brake solution.”

“If you want to reduce climate change in the short term, it’s really important for us to focus on short-lived climate pollutants, which include methane, and also it’s important for us to focus on protecting natural ecosystems,” Cassidy tells Sentient.

Meaty-Tasting Alternatives Could Yield Greatest Impact

Researchers suggested that delaying rapid adoption of alternative proteins until after 2026, or replacing less than 60 percent of animal-sourced foods, would push food systems emissions beyond the 390 GTCO₂e carbon budget. So, how close are we to that goal?

In the United States, 40 percent of Americans tried plant-based meat in 2024, but just 24 percent reported eating it at least once a month, according to research by the Good Food Institute, a group advocating for alternative meats. Meanwhile, 32 percent of Americans found cultivated meat — also known as lab-grown meat — “very” or “somewhat” appealing, and 17 percent said they would be “extremely” or “very” likely to purchase it, though it is not widely available at supermarkets yet.

While alternative options are more visible than ever, only a small share of Americans are actually cutting back on meat. According to research from the Good Food Institute, only 11 percent of Americans reported reducing their meat intake in the past year, labeled flexitarian by GFI. Just two percent identify as pescatarian, two percent are vegetarian and two percent identify as vegan. Even among those who tried plant-based meat in the past year, the majority were not actively cutting back on or eliminating meat from their diet.

Hale and her co-authors stressed how significant dietary change needs to be. Adopting the EAT-Lancet “Healthy Diet” scenario — research-backed recommendations from 2019 that urged a switch to eating more meat and less plants — even fully and quickly, still exceeds the emissions budget.

Meat and dairy products emit far more greenhouse gases than beans and lentils. But transitioning countries to a fully plant-based diet without relying on alternative proteins that more closely mimic meat would take much longer, according to the researchers, and is also highly unlikely given how much meat we consume. That’s why investing in developing tastier, cheaper alternative proteins is essential, Hale says.

Solar Moment Needed for Food

Hale feels alternative proteins offer the “most potential” to help omnivores transition their diets. The authors of the study estimated that switching to alternative proteins could slash food systems emissions by 33 percent, or by 31 percent if meat and dairy is replaced with regular plant products.

Getting more people to swap out their meat — whether with lentils or a cultivated woolly mammoth burger — remains a steep challenge. Global per capita consumption of meat, fish and dairy is expected to rise by six percent by 2034, with the biggest increase in lower middle-income countries.

There has been some progress, Cassidy points out. Alternative proteins have gained popularity in the U.S. and Europe, and some wealthier countries are eating less meat (though the U.S. still eats more beef than any other country in the world, and plant-based meat sales have become sluggish here).

Hale believes consumers will not switch “unless the new products are as good and as cheap or cheaper than what they’re used to.” According to the study, for alternative proteins to become affordable, appealing and scalable, strong regulatory frameworks and both public and private investments are needed — similar to the support that helped grow the renewable energy sector.

“Think about solar. It started in the ‘70s and nobody thought it would ever work and it’s only like five, 10 years that it started scaling and becoming cheap enough for adoption globally. There were a lot of government investments,” Hale says. “So, we need something like that for alternative proteins. Otherwise, it’s going to be too slow,” she adds.

Weston believes the next 10 years will be critical for investors, governments and the food industry. But without major progress on alternative proteins soon, he says, “I don’t see us on the pathway to either 60 percent or 100 percent reduction by 2050.”

Raising awareness is key to encouraging the adoption of meat and dairy alternatives, Cassidy says. “It’s a very important lever for climate action.”

There are other proposed solutions that can help tackle emissions from food. For example, food waste makes up seven percent of greenhouse gas emissions globally, so cutting it in half would free up a significant portion of the carbon budget, Hale says. “There is a wiggle room,” Hale says, doing a bit more in one area could help out another, for instance. Still, she wants the public to understand the urgency of this moment. “We can’t just wait without intervention.”