 |
|
|
|||||
Dog owners have a lot of choices nowadays when it comes to picking out pet food for their pup. Dry kibble or wet? Beef or chicken? Frozen, fresh, or raw? Brands even boast human-grade ingredients and grain-free recipes. If you have a dog, your decision may be focused on nutrients, or maybe price. But one vet-turned-environmental researcher wants you to also consider the climate impact. And that impact could be hugedepending on the type of food, your dogs diet could have a greater environmental impact than your own. Calculating the carbon footprint of dog food What we eat matters for the planet. Globally, food production is responsible for more than a quarter of all greenhouse gas emissions and has impacts on biodiversity, deforestation, and water use. Climate experts agree that eating less meat and more plants is better for the environment. What we feed our pets matters too, says John Harvey, a veterinary surgeon working on environmental sustainability at the University of Edinburgh. In Harveys newest study, published in the Journal of Cleaner Production this week, researchers calculated the carbon footprint of nearly 1,000 types of dog food that are commercially available in the United Kingdom. Though the study is U.K. focused, the dog food market there is similar to the United States: the sample included dry, wet, and raw foods, as well as grain-free and even plant-based options. Harvey and his team found that in the U.K., the production of ingredients for dog food accounts for about 1% of the countrys total greenhouse gas emissions. Though 1% may seem small, it does matter, Harvey says. That’s big. Scaled up, the impact is clearer: If all dogs around the world were fed like they are in the U.K., the emissions to produce that food would be equivalent to more than half of all jet fuel emissions from global commercial aviation. (Dog food emissions actually range enough that they could be 59% to 99% of jet fuel emissions, when scaled up.) Its not clear what share of U.S. emissions comes from dog food, but dog ownership here is even higher. About 36% of U.K. households own a dog, for some 13 million total pups. In the U.S., more than 45% of households own a dog, for a total closer to 90 million, according to the American Veterinary Medical Association. What type of dog food is the most environmentally friendly? Your dog’s environmental pawprint depends on what exactly their food is made up of. And depending on the ingredients, that impact can change drastically: Over those nearly 1,000 different types of pet food, the researchers found a 65-fold difference between lower-impact feed options and higher-impact food. For comparison, the difference between human diets is much smaller: an average high-meat human diet produces 2.5 times the emissions as an average vegan diet. The dog foods with the highest greenhouse gas emissions were those that are meat-rich, wet, raw, or grain-free, the study found. [Image: courtesy The University of Edinburgh] When we look at feeding a 20-kilogram [44-pound] dog on raw food or wet food, many of those have a higher impact than a high meat human diet, Harvey says. Wet grain-free and raw foods also come with about twice the emissions of a human vegan diet. Terms like grain free, fresh, or human grade may sound appealing to pet owners, but studies have found that they dont come with clear health benefits, or generally lack evidence that theyre superior. There are people who really believe in a particular type of feeling, for example, that dogs must be fed like wolves, only meat and raw bones, Harvey says. Well, I would say the veterinary profession I’m not sure is aligned with that, and the evidence isn’t necessarily aligned with those particular positions. Helping dog owners be more aware Harvey doesnt want to demonize any way an owner might feed their dog; he just wants pet owners to be a bit more aware. This is not about saying You’re doing the wrong thing or blaming people, he says. There are opportunities within every single class of food that we looked at to pick a dramatically lower environmentally impactful formulation, and there’s opportunities for manufacturers to reformulate. Beef and lamb are the worst climate offenders when it comes to proteins, for example, so it makes sense that beef and lamb dog foods come with higher emissions. Switching to dog food with chicken would reduce your pups diet emissions. Similarly, foods with prime cuts, similar to what humans eat, have a bigger environmental impact, while those that use meat byproducts are more sustainable. There are also plant-based dog foods, which come with some of the lowest emissions. Pet owners can also be cognizant of managing portion sizes and waste to make their dogs diets more environmentally friendly. Harvey focused on food because it comes with a big impact, but also because its changeable. He even has a website with more information for pet owners. He hopes pet owners do become more aware of the impact of their dogs diets, and that dog food manufacturers become more transparent and better about labeling their ingredients, so customers can make informed choices. With his background as a vet, Harvey knows that pets matter to people. He also knows that were facing a climate crisis. I’d like people to still be able to have a pet as the climate changes, he says. I want those two things to be compatible.
Category:
E-Commerce
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said he plans to meet with Danish officials next week after the Trump administration doubled down on its intention to take over Greenland, the strategic Arctic island that is a self-governing territory of Denmark.Since the capture of former Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro, President Donald Trump has revived his argument that the United States needs to control the world’s largest island to ensure its own security in the face of rising threats from China and Russia in the Arctic.Danish Foreign Minister Lars Lkke Rasmussen and his Greenland counterpart, Vivian Motzfeldt, had requested a meeting with Rubio, according to a statement posted Tuesday to Greenland’s government website. Previous requests for a meeting were not successful, the statement said.Rubio told a select group of U.S. lawmakers that it was the Republican administration’s intention to eventually purchase Greenland, as opposed to using military force.The remarks, first reported by The Wall Street Journal, were made in a classified briefing Monday evening on Capitol Hill, according to a person with knowledge of his comments who was granted anonymity because it was a private discussion.On Wednesday, Rubio told reporters in Washington that Trump has been talking about acquiring Greenland since his first term. “That’s always been the president’s intent from the very beginning,” Rubio said. “He’s not the first U.S. president that has examined or looked at how we could acquire Greenland.” European leaders express concern The leaders of France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain and the United Kingdom joined Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen in issuing a statement this week reaffirming that the mineral-rich island, which guards the Arctic and North Atlantic approaches to North America, “belongs to its people.” Frederiksen warned that a U.S. takeover would amount to the end of NATO.“The Nordics do not lightly make statements like this,” Maria Martisiute, a defense analyst at the European Policy Centre think tank, told The Associated Press on Wednesday. “But it is Trump whose very bombastic language bordering on direct threats and intimidation is threatening the fact to another ally by saying, ‘I will control or annex the territory.'”Rubio, who was on Capitol Hill for a classified briefing Wednesday with the entire U.S. Senate and House, did not directly answer reporters’ questions about whether the administration was willing to risk the NATO alliance by potentially moving ahead with a military option regarding Greenland.“I’m not here to talk about Denmark or military intervention, I’ll be meeting with them next week, we’ll have those conversations with them then, but I don’t have anything further to add to that,” Rubio said. He added that every president retains the option to address national security threats to the United States through military means.White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Tuesday that using the military to acquire Greenland was an option, though she told reporters Wednesday that “the president’s first option always has been diplomacy.”Some Republican senators said they saw strategic value in Greenland, but they stopped short of supporting military action to acquire it.Kansas Sen. Roger Marshall said he hoped “we can work out a deal,” while North Dakota Sen. John Hoeven said some of the discussion about taking Greenland by force has been “misconstrued.”“One of the things about President Trump, you may have noticed, is he keeps our adversaries off balance by making sure they don’t know what we’re going to do,” Hoeven said.But Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski said she hated “the rhetoric around either acquiring Greenland by purchase or by force,” adding, “I think that it is very, very unsettling.”Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire and Republican Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, co-chairs of the bipartisan Senate NATO Observer Group, said the U.S. needs to honor its treaty obligations to Denmark.“Any suggestion that our nation would subject a fellow NATO ally to coercion or external pressure undermines the very principles of self-determination that our Alliance exists to defend,” the senators said in a joint statement. ‘This is America now’ Thomas Crosbie, an associate professor of military operations at the Royal Danish Defense College, said an American takeover would not help Washington’s national security.“The United States will gain no advantage if its flag is flying in Nuuk versus the Greenlandic flag,” he told the AP. “There’s no benefits to them because they already enjoy all of the advantages they want. If there’s any specific security access that they want to improve American security, they’ll be given it as a matter of course, as a trusted ally. So this has nothing to do with improving national security for the United States.”Denmark’s parliament approved a bill in June to allow U.S. military bases on Danish soil. It widened a previous military agreement, made in 2023 with the Biden administration, in which U.S. troops had broad access to Danish air bases in the Scandinavian country. Denmark’s foreign minister has said that Denmark would be able to terminate the agreement if the U.S. tries to annex all or part of Greenland.In the event of military action, the U.S. Department of Defense operates the remote Pituffik Space Base, in northwestern Greenland, and the troops there could be mobilized.Crosbie said he believes the U.S. would not seek to hurt the local population or engage with Danish troops.“They don’t need to bring any firepower. They don’t need to bring anybody,” Crosbie said Wednesday. “They could just direct the military personnel currently there to drive to the center of Nuuk and just say, ‘This is America now,’ right? And that would lead to the same response as if they flew in 500 or 1,000 people.”The danger in an American annexation, he said, lies in the “erosion of the rule of law globally and to the perception that there are any norms protecting anybody on the planet.”He added: “The impact is changing the map. The impact I don’t think would be storming the parliament.” Kim reported from Washington. Geir Moulson in Berlin, Mark Carlson in Brussels, and Ben Finley, Joey Cappelletti and Aamer Madhani in Washington contributed to this report. Stefanie Dazio and Seung Min Kim, Associated Press
Category:
E-Commerce
Less than 24 hours after the horrifying shooting of a woman by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent in Minneapolis, merchandise related to the slain U.S. citizen is already proliferating on e-commerce shopping sites, including on Amazon and Etsy. Heres what you need to know. Whats happened? On Wednesday, a woman was fatally shot by an ICE officer near a raid that federal officials were conducting. The woman was identified by authorities as Renee Nicole Good, a 37-year-old mother and U.S. citizen. As CNN reports, multiple videos taken by bystanders on the scene show ICE agents confronting the car that Good was driving, which was parked sideways on the street. After some verbal interaction between the driver and the officers, the car appears to begin turning, at which point an ICE agent fired multiple shots into the vehicle. Good was reportedly struck in the head by one of the shots and later pronounced dead at a local hospital. Kristi Noem, secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, has accused Good of weaponizing her vehicle in an effort to run over the ICE agent, but any such intent is far from certain at this point. Democratic leaders, on the other hand, have called for an investigation into the incident, and Minnesota Governor Tim Walz has said that his administration will stop at nothing to seek accountability and justice. The incident has quickly become the latest political flashpoint around President Trump’s controversial decision to send federal agents into U.S. cities. Renee Good merch proliferates on Amazon and Etsy Within hours of Goods death, thousands of mourners took to the streets in Minneapolis and other U.S. cities to honor the victim and peacefully protest the actions of the ICE agent. At the same time, another phenomenon began happening: merchandise related to Good and her shooting began rapidly proliferating on online shopping sites like Amazon and Etsy. As of the time of this writing, visitors to these sites can easily find everything from stickers to hats to T-shirts in support of Good and her memory. Such products often sport the phrase Justice for Renee or Justice for GOODness as well as other phrases, including rest in power. Sellers move quickly to capitalize on viral events The fact that Good-related merchandise already exists isnt entirely shocking. As Fast Company previously reported, in recent months, politically contentious events have often led to a quick proliferation of merchandise related to the incidents. In November, the Epstein Bubba email led to an explosion of merch on both Amazon and Etsy, and earlier in 2025, Alligator Alcatraz merch spread on Etsy, where it met significant blowback on social media. However, the ideological motives behind the sellers making this merchandise aren’t always clear. For instance, some of the seller accounts appear to be new, and they don’t always state whether they are opposed or aligned with any of the events that have spawned the merch. What is interesting to note, however, in the case of the Good-related merch, is that some of the Amazon sellers appear to be based in China, suggesting at the very least that individuals overseas are eager to profit from the latest social and political turmoil engulfing the United States. Fast Company has reached out to Etsy and Amazon for comment. Renee Good GoFundMe exceeds $400,000 While some sellers on Amazon and Etsys platforms appear to be keen to profit from a tragic event, other individuals are actively using online platforms to support Renee Goods wife and child. As of the time of this writing, a number of Renee Good fundraisers have been set up on GoFundMe. One such fundraiser, with the stated aim of raising funds for her wife and child, has already surpassed $400,000 in donations from more than 10,300 individuals. Fast Company has reached out to GoFundMe to ask whether the campaign is verified. We will update this story if we hear back.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||