A newsletter is going viral online saying that due to the large carbon footprint of pet food production, the World Economic Forum is advising owners to euthanize their pets. We decided to check the accuracy of the statements made in the newsletter.

Information about the radical initiative of the World Economic Forum appeared on English-speaking conspiracy theories resources. On a site called News Punch it was even posted with the label “fact checked,” that is, “verified information.” Then users various social networks picked up her and steel distribute. December 15 news published even the Rex news agency in its social networks.

The issue of carbon footprint is indeed discussed in many international organizations, and their initiatives are sometimes extremely controversial. For example, blackout sun, collection atmospheric carbon and converting it into diamonds, check-in ocean with giant colonies of algae, Creation transgenic elephants for their settlement in the territories of Eastern Siberia or adaptation camels to the Arctic climate, so that animals, trampling plants, would not allow the tundra to be replaced by forest-tundra.

Like other organizations, the World Economic Forum has repeatedly expressed its concern about climate change, including reporting that pet food production leaves a significant carbon footprint. In 2017 on the official website of the organization came out material about how a superfood diet may not be optimal - both in terms of carbon footprint and for the health of the pet itself. By superfoods, WEF understands those foods that are made from premium varieties of meat that could become part of the human diet, not an animal one. For example, experts argue that there is no need to feed animals from beef tenderloin that could instead go to steak, it is better to consider more environmentally friendly options - feed made from parts of the carcass that are unlikely to end up on a human plate (internal organs or trimmings from premium cuts). Experts also note with reference to the book “Time to Eat the Dog? The Real Guide to Sustainable Living" that the carbon footprint of a medium-sized dog (such as a Corgi, Pit Bull Terrier or Miniature Schnauzer) is equal to that of a large SUV. However, the title of the book is rather satirical, and in its article the WEF does not call for either eating domestic animals or killing them.

In another article, published in 2019, the World Economic Forum again raised the issue of sustainability in animal feed. In particular, it addresses the issue of replacing protein obtained from mammals with protein from insects. However, neither in this material nor anywhere else on the organization’s website is there any mention of the need for the mass killing of domestic animals.

The mailing goes on to mention a CNN article entitled “Our Pets Are Part of the Climate Problem. These tips will help you minimize their carbon footprint.” Such article was actually published in September 2022. In it, journalists quote data from a study by UCLA professor Gregory Okin. By his calculations, feeding domestic dogs and cats in the United States is equivalent to about 64 million tons of carbon dioxide each year. That's about the same impact as 13.6 million cars. “If our furry friends formed their own country, it would rank fifth in global meat consumption after China, the United States, Brazil and Russia,” reports professor. However, immediately after such stunning figures, CNN journalists write that saying goodbye to pets is definitely not an option, because “having a pet in the family is associated with lower levels of stress, fewer heart attacks and a lower risk of depression.” Instead, journalists suggest reconsidering pets’ diets, using more environmentally friendly litter for cat litter boxes, choosing leashes and bags for collecting dog waste from more natural materials, and carefully choosing the breed of your future pet. After all, the carbon footprint of a Chihuahua is much smaller than that of a St. Bernard, and some artificially bred breeds are more prone to certain diseases, and veterinary care for them also leaves a significant carbon footprint. Journalists also point out that cats and dogs are not the only suitable pets; small rodents, birds, snakes, turtles or reptiles can also be considered.

The mailing goes on to mention a Bloomberg article in which journalists allegedly “urge pet owners to let their pets die to fight inflation.” In fact article Titled "Inflation Will Hit You Harder If You Earn Under $300,000. Here's How to Cope," talks about how households at different income levels can rethink their budgets. In particular, the material suggests thinking about the rationality of chemotherapy for animals diagnosed with cancer. This is an extremely expensive procedure, which, as shown research, usually gives a very small increase in life expectancy. In this case, the animal is highly likely to suffer greatly, since pain control in animals is far from the standards accepted for humans. In the Bloomberg material, there are no calls to euthanize healthy pets.

The quote from actress Emma Thompson that the best way to combat global warming is for pet owners to eat them was taken out of context. In 2019, actress pronounced similar words as part of a satirical prediction of the future: "Remember that the average pet has a surprising amount of protein." However, Thompson uttered this phrase precisely in order to urge the population to be more attentive to the problem of climate change.

Moreover, the idea of killing pets to minimize our carbon footprint also flies in the face of environmental logic. Laws majority countries The main method of burying animals is not burial in the ground, but cremation. Cremation itself leaves a significant carbon footprint. According to estimates by the Green Burial Council (GBC), per year in the USA cremated just over a million bodies. The energy expended on their combustion would be enough for 1307 car trips to the Moon and back. By data In 2020, there were 40.8 million domestic cats and 22.6 million dogs in Russia. Let the average cat weigh 5 kg and the dog 30 kg. In total, the total weight of pets in Russia will be 882 million kg. If taken as average weight human figure is 67 kg, then the cremation of all pets in Russia will leave a carbon footprint comparable to the burning of 13,164,179 people. That is 16,991 car trips over a distance equal to the journey to the moon and back!

Therefore, the newsletter contains incorrect and misleading information. The World Economic Forum has never proposed mass euthanization of pets as a measure to combat climate change. CNN and Bloomberg also did not call on animal owners to kill their pets, and Emma Thompson certainly did not call on them to eat them. At the same time, both the WEF and other experts point out that the production of pet food leaves a significant carbon footprint, and propose some measures to reduce it.

Cover image: Pixabay