From rising global temperatures to shrinking ice sheets and rising food insecurity and poverty, the Earth’s climate is responding to human activity. The recent IPCC Synthesis Report served as a grim yet necessary reminder of the changing climate as it emphasised that the chance to ensure a liveable future for everyone is slowly coming to an end.

However, this report should also serve as an incentive as it highlights that we need to focus on equitable solutions, adaptation, and international cooperation. Essentially, it all boils down to new ways of living and cooperating: to innovation.

If you look at the rising methane emissions, it might be intimidating to start tackling climate change but we can start with something as simple as minimising food waste. For instance, one-third of the food intended for consumption is wasted in the United States and once food ends up in landfills, methane is generated, a greenhouse gas that has more than 80 times the warming power of carbon dioxide within the first 20 years in the atmosphere. Still, food waste minimisation does not receive the attention it should.

While traditional initiatives are absolutely necessary, they are not enough. As a result, disruption is required, making a different approach to climate change tackling not only advisable but imperative.

Why aren’t traditional initiatives enough?

Seven years have passed since the Paris Agreement that aimed to keep global warming well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and try to limit it to 1.5°C. However, the effects of human-caused climate change are becoming more and more intense.

For net zero to be achieved, urgent and diverse actions must be taken. This process involves reducing greenhouse emissions as much as possible as well as offsetting any remaining emissions through methods such as carbon credits. Carbon credits are quantifiable and verifiable emission reductions from authorised climate action initiatives. These projects lower, avoid or eliminate greenhouse gas emissions and can be used to compensate for emissions from other sources.

One of these projects is reforestation. While it has received attention from both governments and companies across the world, “reforestation is part of the answer, but it’s unhelpful just to focus on the trees”. Not only are there not enough forests to mitigate all greenhouse gasses, but you may end up contributing to carbon emissions instead of minimising them if you are planting them on carbon-rich soil such as peat.

Nonetheless, there is no this or that as it shouldn’t be about replacement but about intertwinement and improvement. For instance, compared to carbon dioxide, which remains in the atmosphere for centuries, it only, hence it’s easier to quantify the impact that reducing this gas has on tackling climate change.

No net zero without zero waste

Minimising food waste would have massive consequences considering that in the United States alone, the carbon dioxide emissions that food waste generates are equivalent to those of 42 coal-fired power plants. Additionally, the waste sector is accountable for about 20% of human-driven methane emissions globally, and as previously mentioned, methane emissions not only have an immediate effect but also a forceful one. 

It may sound simple but, essentially, when you prevent something from going to waste, you are also preventing methane emissions. In fact, besides the greenhouse gases that are emitted when food ends up in landfills, the energy and water that are utilised when that food is grown, harvested, distributed, and packaged are also wasted.

The effects of food waste and loss should serve as both micro and macro reminders. Micro, because it is something that each and every individual can implement, particularly because 60% of methane emissions are generated by human activities. On the other hand, on a macro level, this should incentive the diversification of the voluntary carbon market. After all, food rescue and minimisation are tactics that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and, consequently, their environmental benefits should be quantified.

Minimising waste & maximising impact on SDGs

While only one of the 2030 SDGs (Sustainable Development Goals) directly addresses food waste minimisation, its impact doesn’t stop there. From tackling food scarcity and water wastage to diminishing poverty and fighting climate change, reducing food waste by half per person will have a domino effect.

In fact, food waste is a global problem, so its effects can be observed from numerous standpoints. For instance, although food is being wasted on a daily basis, the global hunger crisis is on the rise. So, not only are the wasted resources negatively affecting the environment, but the wasted nutrients could also have been used to tackle food insecurity.

Moreover, from a financial standpoint, the food that is wasted annually in the United States costs approximately $218 billion. Simultaneously, the costs are increasing as food prices have spiked by 11.4% in the past year.

Therefore, actions such as upcycling, food rescuing, or composting not only fight climate change but also have social and economical benefits such as tackling the global food crisis, encouraging responsible production and consumption, and reducing the increased demand for resources and energy.

Turning waste into profit

While harnessing today’s solutions to create a sustainable and resilient future is essential, the urgency of the climate crisis makes it necessary to develop new ones. Therefore, innovation is key for meeting the 2030 SDGs and achieving Net Zero by 2050. 

However, for true innovation to be possible, not only do we need to change the way we consume and live, but we also need to reinvent the way we approach climate change solutions. Waste, for example, is like a double-edged sword. Its potential is boundless, yet this can have both positive and negative consequences. Still, the reality is that even if you wouldn’t get any benefits out of waste, it is still better than food ending up in landfills. 

Overall, inaction has never been the answer and not doing anything is also making a choice. After all, change starts from the ground up and, as the report stressed, the power is in our hands as between 40 and 70% of the 2050 projected emissions could be cut by implementing end-use measures.

Author: Jean Pierre Azañedo, CEO & co-founder at CoreZero