Introduction

More and more consumers are turning to plant-based alternatives to cow’s milk, and one of the main reasons for this shift is the environmental impact. Plant-based drinks like those made from soy, oat, almond, or rice are presented as more eco-friendly options, generally with a lower carbon impact. In this article, we will examine the difference in carbon footprint between animal-derived milk and plant-based drinks. We will also review the methods for calculating carbon impact and the factors influencing these figures, to help you better understand the real issues and the solutions available to you.

What is the Carbon Footprint?

The carbon footprint is a measure indicating the total amount of greenhouse gases emitted by an activity or product throughout its life cycle. This includes raw material extraction, transportation, processing, distribution, and even waste disposal. In the context of food products like milk or plant-based drinks, the goal is to calculate the total emissions of carbon dioxide (CO₂), methane (CH₄), and nitrous oxide (N₂O) throughout the production chain.

When we talk about the carbon impact of cow’s milk compared to plant-based drinks, we must consider:

1. Cattle farming (feeding, methane emissions, etc.).
2. Production and harvesting of plants used to feed the cows.
3. Milk processing (pasteurization, packaging).
4. Transportation to distributors and consumers.
5. End-of-life of packaging.

For plant-based milk, the components are different, but the principle remains the same:

1. Cultivation of plants (soy, oat, almond, rice, etc.).
2. Harvesting, transportation, and processing into a drink.
3. Packaging.
4. Transportation to sales points.
5. End-of-life of packaging.

Cow’s Milk and Its Carbon Impact

Cow’s milk is generally associated with a higher carbon impact than plant-based drinks. Several studies estimate that one liter of cow’s milk emits on average between 1 and 1.2 kg of CO₂ equivalent. What accounts for this figure?

Methane Emissions

Cows produce methane during their digestion process, a greenhouse gas much more potent than CO₂ in the short term. The bacteria present in their digestive system release this methane, and since cattle farming is widespread, the total emissions are significant.

Production of Feed for Livestock

Let’s not forget the feed intended for cows. A large amount of arable land is dedicated to producing cereals and soy to feed the animals. This intensive agriculture requires energy, water, and can cause deforestation in some regions (notably for imported soy). All this contributes to increasing the carbon footprint of a liter of milk, as the emissions generated by the production of livestock feed must be taken into account.

Processing and Transportation

The pasteurization and all the processing stages of milk consume energy. Transportation between the farm, the processing plant, and sales points also leads to additional CO₂ emissions. Added to this is the management and disposal of waste, such as whey, which can impact the environment.

Plant-Based Drinks: A Reduced Carbon Impact?

Plant-based drinks, although lighter in carbon, are not entirely neutral for the environment. To be clear, they do present a major advantage over cow’s milk: the absence of methane, the main drawback of cattle farming. Let’s look at some popular plant-based drinks and their average carbon footprint, knowing that figures can vary depending on cultivation methods, regions, and transportation modes.

Soy Milk

Soy milk is one of the most popular and oldest alternatives. Generally, it is estimated that one liter of soy milk emits between 0.2 and 0.4 kg of CO₂ equivalent. This variation is explained by how the soy is cultivated and harvested: whether the production is local or not, whether it comes from deforestation-free fields, and whether or not chemical inputs are used. Overall, soy requires less water than almond trees, and soy milk production is considered relatively energy-efficient, especially if the soy is locally or regionally sourced.

Oat Milk

Oat milk is gaining popularity and sometimes stands out as the most ecological of all. It generally falls within a range of 0.2 to 0.3 kg of CO₂ equivalent per liter. Oats require fewer resources and adapt to more temperate climates, limiting irrigation needs. Moreover, oats can be grown locally in many countries, avoiding long-distance transport. The processing to obtain the drink remains more or less identical to other plant-based milks, hence its overall favorable carbon footprint.

Almond Milk

Almond milk is known for being quite water-intensive, especially in California, where most of the world’s almonds are produced. Its direct carbon footprint is often estimated around 0.3 to 0.5 kg of CO₂ equivalent per liter, a figure that varies depending on the origin of the almonds and water consumption. The main issue remains the significant irrigation of almond trees in regions sometimes subject to drought. However, in terms of greenhouse gas emissions alone, almond milk still ranks below cow’s milk.

Rice Milk

Rice milk has an impact that can vary from 0.3 to 0.4 kg of CO₂ equivalent per liter, depending on how the rice is cultivated. Rice cultivation also emits methane, but in a smaller proportion than cattle farming. However, rice cultivation generally requires flooded areas, increasing evaporation and water consumption. Despite this, its carbon impact remains lower than that of cow’s milk.

Overall Comparison and Key Figures

To summarize, we can establish the following average figures, keeping in mind that they vary depending on studies, geographical areas, and production methods:

• Cow’s milk: about 1 to 1.2 kg CO₂ per liter.
• Soy: about 0.2 to 0.4 kg CO₂ per liter.
• Oat: about 0.2 to 0.3 kg CO₂ per liter.
• Almond: about 0.3 to 0.5 kg CO₂ per liter.
• Rice: about 0.3 to 0.4 kg CO₂ per liter.

In all cases, plant-based drinks generate less greenhouse gas than cow’s milk. The difference is largely due to cattle methane, intensive use of arable land, and potential deforestation to feed this livestock. Even though each plant-based drink has its own impact factors (irrigation for almond, international transport for soy, etc.), their overall carbon footprint remains lower.

Beyond Carbon: Water, Biodiversity, and Land Use

The question of environmental impact goes beyond just the carbon footprint. To establish a complete comparison, it is useful to consider other parameters, such as:

1. Water consumption.
2. Land use.
3. Biodiversity preservation.
4. Pesticides and chemical fertilizers.

Water Consumption

Cow’s milk, like any animal-derived product, requires large amounts of water, both to hydrate the cows and to irrigate the cereal or soy crops intended for their feed. According to some estimates, producing one liter of cow’s milk can require about 600 to 800 liters of water, although these figures vary depending on the farming method and the region of the world.

Plant-based drinks are not left out. Almond, for example, is criticized for its high water needs. However, when balancing the water needed to produce a liter of almond milk against the total water required for a liter of cow’s milk, almond remains competitive, even if the gap is not as significant as in the field of carbon emissions.

Land Use

Cattle farming requires large parcels of land for grazing or for cultivating plants intended for their feed. Cow’s milk production is therefore very space-consuming. In contrast, plant crops intended for plant milk production are generally less energy-intensive in terms of surface area. Oats, soy, and rice can sometimes be grown on smaller surfaces, although in the case of soy, large-scale production can also involve deforestation risks in some regions of the globe.

Biodiversity Preservation

Agricultural intensification and industrial farming can reduce biodiversity by converting natural habitats into agricultural land. On the other hand, monocultures of soy or almonds can also pose biodiversity and soil balance problems. The best way to limit the negative impact is to choose, when possible, organic products from local and environmentally friendly sectors (for example, through the practice of suitable crop rotation).

Pesticides and Chemical Fertilizers

The use of pesticides and chemical fertilizers in some crops can have repercussions on soil quality, farmer health, and water pollution. Whether for cow’s milk or plant-based drinks, the origin and production methods matter. Extensive and local farming will have a different impact than industrial farming. Similarly, a plant-based drink from environmentally friendly crops will have a lower impact than a drink produced in intensive monoculture with heavy pesticide use.

Ethical Issues and Health

Of course, choosing a product based on its carbon impact is just one aspect. The reasons for opting for a plant-based alternative to cow’s milk can be multiple, such as:

1. Animal welfare: The living conditions of dairy cows can be controversial, especially in intensive farming.
2. Health considerations: Some consumers are lactose intolerant, others prefer a vegan diet or limit their dairy consumption for various reasons.
3. Personal ethics: Some want to reduce animal exploitation as much as possible, even if some plant-based drinks still involve the use of fertilizers or the displacement of pollinating insects.

Beyond the carbon dimension, these drinks offer different nutritional profiles. Soy milk is notable for its protein content, often close to that of cow’s milk, while almond milk is richer in vitamin E and added calcium. Oat drinks are increasingly enriched with vitamins and minerals, while offering a soft and pleasant taste. It is therefore possible to vary the pleasures while benefiting from interesting nutrients, all while limiting one’s impact on the planet as much as possible.

Tips for Reducing the Carbon Footprint of Your Diet

Whether you consume cow’s milk or plant-based drinks, there are ways to reduce your environmental impact:

1. Choose local products
   Favor farms and producers close to you to limit transportation and support the local economy.

2. Opt for quality labels
   Organic, fair trade, or biodiversity protection labels ensure that production meets a number of environmental and social criteria.

3. Buy in bulk when possible
   Some plant-based drinks (or at least their bases) can be found in bulk or large-format packaging, reducing the amount of waste produced.

4. Vary your consumption
   Instead of always consuming the same plant-based drink, alternate between soy, oat, almond, etc. This will limit the pressure on a single crop and contribute to more diversified agriculture.

5. Make your own plant milk at home
   If possible, preparing a plant-based drink at home can reduce the carbon footprint by eliminating some packaging and industrial transportation. It’s also an opportunity to better control the ingredients used.

6. Stay informed about the origin of raw materials
   The origin of ingredients (non-GMO soy, almonds from less drought-prone regions, etc.) influences the overall impact. Learn about product traceability.

Trends and the Future

The plant-based drink market continues to expand. New alternatives are emerging, based on peas, hemp, hazelnut, buckwheat, or even various legumes. Innovations also focus on production and processing methods, with less energy-intensive processes or initiatives aiming to use fully recyclable or compostable packaging.

On the cow’s milk side, some initiatives are trying to reduce the carbon footprint of farming by improving effluent management, cow feeding (to reduce methane production), and agricultural practices. However, it remains difficult to achieve the low footprint specific to plant-based drinks, as methane emissions related to animal digestion cannot be circumvented.

Consumers play a major role in this evolution. By expressing stronger expectations regarding the environment and animal welfare, they encourage companies to innovate and offer more planet-friendly products. In the long term, we can expect to see increasingly optimized formulas environmentally, with ingredients from regenerative agriculture and eco-designed packaging.

Conclusion

Cow’s milk and plant-based drinks differ significantly in terms of carbon impact. Plant-based alternatives generally have a lower carbon footprint, thanks to the absence of methane from bovine enteric fermentation and often more moderate resource consumption. However, these drinks are not without environmental impact, notably for almond, which consumes a lot of water, or soy, which can be associated with deforestation in some parts of the world.

Carbon footprint figures clearly show the advantage of plant-based milks, even though values can vary depending on origin and production methods. As a consumer, it is possible to further reduce your impact by favoring local, organic products, varying your diet, and minimizing waste. Moreover, other factors come into play in this choice: animal welfare, health, or personal ethics.

Ultimately, taking a step towards plant-based drinks can help reduce individual carbon footprints and protect the planet. With the vast variety of options available on the market and the possibility of making your own plant milk, everyone can get involved at their level and make more informed decisions about their milk and substitute consumption. The issues related to climate, biodiversity, and animal welfare are more pressing than ever, which is why this move towards sustainable alternatives can have a real positive impact, both for our health and that of the planet.