When it comes to responding to the climate crisis, we put a lot of emphasis on doing things. Who can argue with that when LOTS of actions—big and small—are urgently required to move us from our fossil-fueled status quo to a decarbonized future.
But, while action on climate is important, how and when can doing less (or, in some instances, nothing at all) be good for our over-heating planet?
Here are a few ideas.
1. Working less
Be like those Europeans!
In 2022, The Washington Post published “How a four-day workweek could be better for the climate”. It’s worth reading in full1, but here’s a taste:
Over the years, studies have documented a link between fewer working hours and lower emissions — reductions that experts explain may be the result of changes to commuting, energy use and lifestyle habits. One analysis of data looking at more than two dozen countries from 1970 to 2007 predicted that if work hours were reduced by 10 percent, there could be drops in ecological footprint, carbon footprint and carbon dioxide emissions by 12.1 percent, 14.6 percent and 4.2 percent, respectively.
…
Shorter working hours could lead to reductions in energy usage, experts said.
According to a 2006 paper, if the United States adopted European work standards, the country would consume about 20 percent less energy. And if Europeans gave up those shorter workweeks, the authors wrote they would “consume some additional 25 percent more energy.”
“There’s a definite relation between production, consumption and carbon emissions,” said Weisbrot, who co-wrote the 2006 paper.
Energy could also be conserved if less resources are needed to heat and cool large office buildings, Schor said, reducing demands on electricity.
2. Less meat and less dairy
Vegan cheese, anyone?
I can’t really remember a dinner during my South African childhood in which meat and dairy didn’t feature. These days, I’m still omnivorous, but I tend to treat animal products as a treat (something to be consumed less frequently and in smaller quantities).
For those of us for whom meat2 and dairy continue to be a huge part of our diets, cutting back would have hugely positive implications for the climate. Per this Anthropocene Magazine piece from 2022:
If high-income nations switch to plant-based diets, they would cut greenhouse gas emissions and sequester almost 100 billions tons of CO2 by 2100—provided the land formerly used to farm animals was reverted to its natural state.
These hopeful numbers emerged from a recent Nature Food study which explored what would happen if we put the onus on 54 of the wealthiest meat-consuming nations to adopt the official EAT-Lancet planetary health diet, which prioritizes diets rich in fruit, veg, and grains over animal-based foods3.
The Planetary Health Diet isn’t just better for the planet: it’s much healthier for you too. Again, Anthropocene Magazine spills the beans on new (June 2024) research:
People who follow a diet rich in plants cut their mortality risk by almost a third, while simultaneously slashing the climate impact of their food by a similar amount. These results come from the largest study ever to analyze the health and environmental impacts of the widely-publicized EAT-Lancet Planetary Health Diet.
For more on the staggering climate impacts of meat and dairy, check out this fabulous interactive feature from Carbon Brief.
3. Less stuff
Cutting consumption.
Atmos dishes on “The Rise of the “No Buy Year”:
Faced with the rising cost of daily living and the looming threat of climate disaster, more and more people are pledging to consume and spend less—particularly those in the Global North who are in the privileged position to have extraneous spending to cut down on. Nearly all Americans are cutting back on their spending in some way, according to a new CNBC and Morning Consult survey, with nearly 80% of consumers cutting spending on non-essential goods over the last six months. At the extreme end of the spectrum are those pledging to do away with impulsive spending habits altogether and committing to the “no buy” year.
The article points out that the climate consequences of small purchases—buying “stuff”—add up to something significant:
A 2020 study conducted by Christoph Meinrenken, an associate research scientist at the Earth Institute’s Research Program on Sustainability Policy and Management, found that on average, products generate carbon emissions equivalent to 6.3 times their own weight. Meanwhile, the shipping activities of only four major retailers—Amazon, Walmart, Target, and IKEA—have contributed over 20 million tons of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere in the past two years, according to a 2021 report by Pacific Environment and supply chain research group Stand.earth.
Currently, human consumption exceeds the Earth’s ecosystem’s capacity for regeneration by 74% annually, equating to the demand of 1.75 Earths, explains associate professor Anitra Nelson – Honorary Principal Fellow at the Informal Urbanism Research Hub (InfUr-) at The University of Melbourne. “If we don’t reduce to one planet footprint then we jeopardise our future existence as a species on Earth.”
Read the rest
4. A day of rest
Slowing down to a weekly stop.
Earlier this year, the Washington Post’s Climate Coach columnist4, wrote beautifully about his own weekly sabbath—a day spent with family and friends (often in nature) and away from digital devices and work:
For millennia, religions have regarded this ritual rest as a spiritual necessity. Yet clergy are now arguing that this practice, whether in a secular or religious context, can help redirect the world’s societies away from catastrophic climate change. In their view, it’s as essential to the future as any clean-energy technology or electric vehicle.
A shared day of rest, at a minimum, might slow the pace of consumption, curb emissions or ease the burden of so many people working weary weekends. But slowing down, even for a day, may also be at the heart of a cultural change convincing society that a more sustainable way of life is not only good for the planet, but also good for them.
Read more from Michael Coren about why, no matter your religious persuasion, a observing the sabbath is good for you—and for the planet
Hopefully this gift link will enable you to read it. If you’re not a subscriber, do consider
If you are a beef eater, there are some great reasons to go for quality over quantity—choosing the occasional grass-fed beef from your local farmers’ market over regularly consuming the industrialized imported alternative. That said, despite grass-fed beef having been marketed as “climate friendly,” research suggests that this sadly isn’t the case. Therefore, indulge sparingly.
It’s worth noting that, while emphasising plants, the Planetary Health Diet doesn’t “ban” meat and dairy, but does propose consuming these sparingly. As the EAT- Lancet Commission puts it, “The planetary health diet is flexible by providing guidelines to ranges of different food groups that together constitute an optimal diet for human health and environmental sustainability. It emphasizes a plant-forward diet where whole grains, fruits, vegetables, nuts and legumes comprise a greater proportion of foods consumed. Meat and dairy constitute important parts of the diet but in significantly smaller proportions than whole grains, fruits, vegetables, nuts and legumes.”
Subscribe to his newsletter—it’s great!