Home / Animal Lives And Co2 Impact How Vegavriend Makes Your Contribution Measurable
Animal Lives and CO2 Impact: How VegaVriend Makes Your Contribution Measurable
02/03/2025
17 minutes
At VegaVriend, we strive for a better world. That’s why we display the number of animal lives you save and the amount of CO2 emissions you prevent with each purchase. These calculations are based on research by Andrew Knight, published in the study “The relative benefits for environmental sustainability of vegan diets for dogs, cats, and people“. In this text, we explain how these numbers are calculated.
1. What Is Your Impact on Animal Lives and CO₂ Emissions?
Animal Lives Saved: This number indicates how many animal lives are saved by choosing our products instead of comparable animal-based products.
CO2 Savings: This value shows how many kilograms of CO2-equivalents (CO2-eq.) are saved through your purchase.
What are CO2-equivalents? – view/hide
CO2-equivalents include not only carbon dioxide (CO2) but also other greenhouse gases, such as methane and nitrous oxide. By converting these gases into CO2-eq., we can better understand their combined impact on climate change.
For example, using CO2-equivalents makes it clear that a plant-based diet produces significantly fewer greenhouse gases than a meat-based diet. One kilogram of methane, for instance, has the same impact as 25 kg of CO2.
2. Which VegaVriend Products Save Animal Lives and Reduce CO₂ Emissions?
The calculations are specifically made for food and snacks. For products such as toys, cat litter, and grooming products, no savings in animal lives or CO2 emissions apply, as these products typically do not contain animal ingredients.
However, many of these products are designed with sustainability in mind. This means attention is given to the use of recycled materials, minimizing plastic, and efficient production processes that consume less energy and water. This approach makes the products more sustainable than comparable options, not by replacing animal ingredients with plant-based ones, but through conscious choices in material use and production.
3. How Do We Calculate the Animal Lives and CO₂ Impact of Your Purchases?
- Scientific Research The relative benefits for environmental sustainability of vegan diets for dogs, cats, and people (Knight, 2023). This study describes the impact of vegan diets on animal lives and the environment. Read the study.
- Additional Information Sources
- The book Dog.Eat.Plant. (Kreischer & Scholtes, 2020) provides practical data on vegan diets for pets. Visit the website.
- The website of Milieu Centraal offers insights into the average CO2 emissions of various activities, such as transportation and food production. View the data.
The Methodology:
- Animal Lives are calculated based on the number of calories (kcal) a product contains. This provides an objective comparison between animal-based and plant-based foods.
- CO2 Savings are calculated based on the weight of the product, in accordance with standards from life cycle analyses (LCA).
The detailed steps and calculations are explained in the following chapters.
4. How Many Animal Lives Do You Save With Our Products?
The calculation of animal lives saved is based on the number of calories (kcal) in the product, as calories serve as a direct measure of the energy requirements of pets. This allows for a fair comparison, as the energy content determines the amount of food needed.
4.1 How Do We Measure Saved Animal Lives?
A small piece of meat often contains more calories than a large volume of plant-based food. By calculating with calories, we can fairly compare how many animals are needed to meet the energy needs of pets.
4.2 The Calculation
- Average dog of 20.1 kg with a daily energy requirement of 1351 kcal.
- Average cat of 4.1 kg with a daily energy requirement of 222 kcal.
(Knight, 2023, p. 4)
Food Consumption
The calculations are based on data from the United States, as extensive data is available there on food consumption and production. While the U.S. has specific dietary habits, these trends align well with European and Dutch consumption patterns. This is because food consumption in these regions has a similar distribution of animal and plant-based products, as well as a focus on calories and proteins in diets.
In the United States, there are:
- 86.3 million dogs with a total annual energy requirement of 42,555,824,500,000 kcal.
- 61.1 million cats with a total annual energy requirement of 4,950,933,000,000 kcal.
In Knight’s study, calculations were made on how many animals are killed per year for food. Extensive datasets on food production and consumption were used, analyzing the energy content of both animal-based and plant-based foods and their consumption by humans and pets. Of this animal consumption:
- 80% is consumed by humans,
- 17.7% by dogs,
- 2.3% by cats.
The tables below, taken from Knight’s study, present these calculations and help users understand the scale of saved animal lives and CO2 emissions (expressed in CO2-eq.). They provide quantitative insight into the number of animal lives and CO2 emissions that can be saved by choosing plant-based alternatives. This makes the impact of conscious choices directly visible and measurable.
Click here to view/hide Table 1
Table 1: Number of Land Animals Killed Annually for Food in the U.S. (Millions of Animals)
| Animal Type | Total U.S. (100%) x 1,000,000 |
For Humans (80%) x 1,000,000 |
For Dogs (17.7%) x 1,000,000 |
For Cats (2.3%) x 1,000,000 |
For Dogs and Cats (20%) x 1,000,000 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Poultry | 9,592.1 | 7,672.6 | 1,700.3 | 219.3 | 1,919.6 |
| Pigs | 131.6 | 105.3 | 23.3 | 3.0 | 26.3 |
| Cattle | 33.4 | 26.7 | 5.9 | 0.8 | 6.7 |
| Sheep and Goats | 2.9 | 2.4 | 0.5 | 0.07 | 0.6 |
| Other Land Animals | 0.08 | 0.06 | 0.01 | 0.002 | 0.02 |
| Total | 9,760.1 | 7,807.0 | 1,729.1 | 223.1 | 1,952.2 |
Source: Knight A. (2023) The relative benefits for environmental sustainability of vegan diets for dogs, cats, and people, Table 12.
Significantly more fish are killed than land animals. In Knight’s (2023) study, estimates of these numbers are provided. Of the fish used in pet food, approximately 15% goes to dog food and 85% to cat food. However, the majority of the fish killed is consumed by humans.
According to Knight, it is estimated that only 1% of the fish killed is processed into food for dogs and cats, while the remaining 99% is consumed by humans. The table below combines the first two columns from Knight’s research with additional calculations for the other columns.
Click here to view/hide Table 2
Table 2: Number of Aquatic Animals Killed for Food in the U.S. (Millions of Animals)
| Type | Total U.S.* (100%) x 1,000,000,000 |
For Humans (99%) x 1,000,000 |
For Dogs (0.15%) x 1,000,000 |
For Cats (0.85%) x 1,000,000 |
For Dogs and Cats (1%) x 1,000,000 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fishmeal (‘Feedfish’) | 45.5 – 92.3 | 68,900 | 105 | 584 | 689 |
| Shellfish | 43.1 | 43,100 | 66 | 365 | 431 |
| Bycatch (Other Species) | 14.5 – 32.8 | 23,650 | 36 | 200 | 236 |
| Finfish | 3.8 | 3,800 | 6 | 32 | 38 |
| Total | 106.9 – 172.0 | 139,450 | 212 | 1,182 | 1,395 |
| * If two numbers are mentioned, the average was used for calculations. | |||||
Source: Knight A. (2023) The relative benefits for environmental sustainability of vegan diets for dogs, cats, and people, Table 12.
Click here to view/hide Table 3
Table 3: Fish and Shellfish Consumed Annually in the Diets of U.S. Dogs, Cats, and Humans (Millions)
| Type | Total U.S.* (100%) x 1,000,000,000 |
For Humans (99%) x 1,000,000 |
For Dogs (0.15%) x 1,000,000 |
For Cats (0.85%) x 1,000,000 |
For Dogs and Cats (1%) x 1,000,000 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fish – Fisheries (2007-2016 avg.) | 6,287 – 13,512 | 9,900 | 15 | 84 | 99 |
| Fish – Aquaculture (2017) | 0.244 – 0.583 | 414 | 1 | 4 | 4 |
| Shellfish (2017) | 2,053 – 3,336 | 2,695 | 4 | 23 | 27 |
| * If two numbers are mentioned, the average was used for calculations. | |||||
Source: Knight A. (2023) The relative benefits for environmental sustainability of vegan diets for dogs, cats, and people, Table 13.
The next step is to calculate how many animals are consumed on average by a dog or cat, both per year and per day. To illustrate this, an example calculation is provided below, offering insight into the number of animal lives required for different diets.
Example Calculation – View/Hide
- In the U.S., 131,639,000 pigs are slaughtered annually. 17.7% of the meat is consumed by dogs, which amounts to 23,333,923 pigs per year.
- There are 86.3 million dogs in the U.S.
- On average, each dog consumes 23,333,923 / 86,300,000 = 0.27 pigs per year.
Since the average daily calorie requirement is known (1,351 kcal for a dog and 222 kcal for a cat), it is possible to calculate how many animals are consumed per year. This is summarized in the table below.
Click here to view/hide Table 4
Table 4: Number of animals per year and per day consumed by an average dog (20.1 kg / 1351 kcal per day) and cat (4.1 kg / 222 kcal per day)
| Animal type | Dogs (number per year) |
Cats (number per year) |
Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poultry | 19.70 | 3.59 | |
| Pigs | 0.27 | 0.05 | |
| Cattle | 0.07 | 0.01 | |
| Sheep and goats | 0.01 | 0.00 | |
| Other animals | 0.00 | 0.00 | |
| Total | 20.05 | 3.65 | |
| Fish feed | 1.2 | 9.6 | |
| Shellfish | 0.8 | 6.0 | |
| Bycatch of animals | 0.4 | 3.3 | |
| Finfish | 0.1 | 0.5 | |
| Total | 2.5 | 19.4 | |
| Fish – wild catch (avg. 2007-2016) | 0.17 | 1.37 | |
| Fish – aquaculture (2017) | 0.01 | 0.06 | |
| Shellfish (2017) | 0.05 | 0.37 | |
| Total animals per year | 22.7 | 24.8 | Sum of all bolded numbers |
| Total animals per day | 0.0623 | 0.0680 | Divided by 365 |
| Total animals per kcal | 0.0000461 | 0.0003061 | Total animals divided by daily kcal consumption (dogs 1351 and cats 222) |
Source: Calculations based on data from Knight A. (2023) and additional calculations by VegaVriend.
Daily Consumption Per kcal:
- Dogs: 0.0000461 animals per kcal.
- Cats: 0.0003061 animals per kcal.
Number of Animals Per Product:
Using the values calculated above, we can determine how many animal lives are saved for each product. Below is an example calculation for a 10 kg bag of dog food, where the kibble has an energy content of 350 kcal per 100 grams.
Click here to view/hide Table 5
Table 5: Example Calculation of Animal Lives Saved by a 10 kg Bag of Dog Food
| Bag of Food Data | Quantity | Unit | Calculation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Calories per 100 grams of product | 350 | kcal/100 grams | |
| Weight of packaging | 10 | kg | |
| = Calories × Packaging Weight | 35,000 | kcal/package | (350 / 0.1) × 10 |
| Factor of animals per kcal (dog) | 0.0000461 | ||
| Number of animals saved per 10 kg package | 1.61 | 35,000 × 0.0000461 |
Source: Calculations based on data from Knight A. (2023) and additional calculations by VegaVriend.
5. How Much CO₂ Do You Save With Plant-Based Food?
The calculation is based on the amount of CO₂-equivalents (CO₂-eq) saved by choosing plant-based instead of animal-based ingredients. This difference is determined by comparing the average CO₂-eq required for the production of animal-based ingredients versus plant-based ingredients.
5.1 How do we measure the amount of CO₂ saved?
The weight of food provides direct insight into the raw materials, energy, and transportation required for production. This makes it a practical measure for calculating the environmental impact of different products. In Knight’s research, CO₂ emissions were calculated per kilogram of product, aligning with the datasets used. These datasets standardly report food impact per kilogram, ensuring a reliable and consistent comparison.
This method does not calculate the specific impact of a single product, but rather the difference in impact between fully plant-based products and an average variant containing animal ingredients. This allows for a clear and fair demonstration of how plant-based products have a lower environmental impact.
5.2 The calculation
Below is a detailed description of the calculations:
- CO₂ Emissions (Expressed in CO₂-eq) Per Ingredient Type:
The climate impact of different ingredients is calculated based on their CO₂-equivalents (CO₂-eq). Knight references the research by Poore and Nemecek (2018): Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers, Supplementary materials. This study, published in Science, uses an extensive life cycle analysis (LCA) to measure climate impact throughout a product’s lifecycle.
This LCA accounts for:
- Land use: The effect of agricultural land on climate change.
- Animal feed production: CO₂ emissions from producing feed for animals.
- Farm operations: Includes the use of machinery such as tractors.
- Processing: Energy and resources required for processing products.
- Transport: Movement of raw materials and final products.
- Packaging: The impact of packaging materials.
- Retail: Emissions from product distribution and sales.
The tables below present the LCA results for plant-based and animal-based products (measured in kg CO₂-eq).
Click here to view/hide Table 6
Table 6: LCA Results of Plant-Based Products – Climate Impact (kg CO₂-eq.)
| Product | Land Use | Animal Feed | Farm | Processing | Transport | Packaging | Retail | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wheat & Rye (Bread) | 0,1 | 0,0 | 0,8 | 0,2 | 0,1 | 0,1 | 0,1 | 1,4 |
| Corn (Meal) | 0,3 | 0,0 | 0,5 | 0,1 | 0,1 | 0,1 | 0,0 | 1,0 |
| Barley (Beer) | 0,0 | 0,0 | 0,2 | 0,1 | 0,0 | 0,5 | 0,3 | 1,1 |
| Oatmeal | 0,0 | 0,0 | 1,4 | 0,0 | 0,1 | 0,1 | 0,0 | 1,6 |
| Rice | 0,0 | 0,0 | 3,6 | 0,1 | 0,1 | 0,1 | 0,1 | 3,8 |
| Potatoes | 0,0 | 0,0 | 0,2 | 0,0 | 0,1 | 0,0 | 0,0 | 0,4 |
| Cassava | 0,6 | 0,0 | 0,2 | 0,0 | 0,1 | 0,0 | 0,0 | 1,0 |
| Other Legumes | 0,0 | 0,0 | 1,1 | 0,0 | 0,1 | 0,4 | 0,0 | 1,6 |
| Peas | 0,0 | 0,0 | 0,7 | 0,0 | 0,1 | 0,0 | 0,0 | 0,9 |
| Nuts | -2.1 | 0,0 | 2,1 | 0,0 | 0,1 | 0,1 | 0,0 | 0,3 |
| Peanuts | 0,4 | 0,0 | 1,4 | 0,4 | 0,1 | 0,1 | 0,0 | 2,5 |
| Soy Milk | 0,2 | 0,0 | 0,1 | 0,2 | 0,1 | 0,1 | 0,3 | 0,9 |
| Tofu | 1,0 | 0,0 | 0,5 | 0,8 | 0,2 | 0,2 | 0,3 | 2,9 |
| Soybean oil | 3,1 | 0,0 | 1,5 | 0,3 | 0,3 | 0,8 | 0,0 | 6,1 |
| Palm oil | 3,1 | 0,0 | 2,1 | 1,3 | 0,2 | 0,9 | 0,0 | 7,6 |
| Sunflower oil | 0,1 | 0,0 | 2,1 | 0,2 | 0,2 | 0,9 | 0,0 | 3,6 |
| Rapeseed oil | 0,2 | 0,0 | 2,3 | 0,2 | 0,2 | 0,8 | 0,0 | 3,8 |
| Olive oil | -0,4 | 0,0 | 4,3 | 0,7 | 0,5 | 0,9 | 0,0 | 5,9 |
| Tomatoes | 0,4 | 0,0 | 0,7 | 0,0 | 0,2 | 0,1 | 0,0 | 1,4 |
| Onions & Leek | 0,0 | 0,0 | 0,2 | 0,0 | 0,1 | 0,0 | 0,0 | 0,4 |
| Root vegetables | 0,0 | 0,0 | 0,2 | 0,0 | 0,1 | 0,0 | 0,0 | 0,4 |
| Cabbage varieties | 0,0 | 0,0 | 0,3 | 0,0 | 0,1 | 0,0 | 0,0 | 0,4 |
| Other Vegetables | 0,0 | 0,0 | 0,2 | 0,1 | 0,2 | 0,0 | 0,0 | 0,5 |
| Citrus fruit | -0,1 | 0,0 | 0,3 | 0,0 | 0,1 | 0,0 | 0,0 | 0,3 |
| Bananas | 0,0 | 0,0 | 0,3 | 0,1 | 0,3 | 0,1 | 0,0 | 0,7 |
| Apples | 0,0 | 0,0 | 0,2 | 0,0 | 0,1 | 0,0 | 0,0 | 0,4 |
| Berries & Grapes | 0,0 | 0,0 | 0,7 | 0,0 | 0,2 | 0,2 | 0,0 | 1,2 |
| Other Fruit | 0,1 | 0,0 | 0,4 | 0,0 | 0,2 | 0,0 | 0,0 | 0,8 |
| Grains & Other Oil Crops | 0,2 | 0,0 | 0,7 | 0,2 | 0,1 | 0,1 | 0,0 | 1,3 |
Source: Poore J., Nemecek T. (2018). Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers. Science.
Click here to view/hide Table 7
Table 7: LCA Results of Animal-Based Products – Climate Impact (kg CO₂-eq.)
| Product | Land Use | Animal Feed | Farm | Processing | Transport | Packaging | Retail | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beef (Beef Cattle) | 16.3 | 1.9 | 39.4 | 1.3 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 59.6 |
| Beef (Dairy Cattle) | 0.9 | 2.5 | 15.7 | 1.1 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 21.1 |
| Lamb & Sheep Meat | 0.5 | 2.4 | 19.5 | 1.1 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 24.4 |
| Pork | 1.5 | 2.9 | 1.7 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 7.3 |
| Poultry | 2.5 | 1.8 | 0.7 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 6.1 |
| Cheese | 4.5 | 2.3 | 13.1 | 0.7 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 21.2 |
| Eggs | 0.7 | 2.2 | 1.3 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 4.5 |
| Fish (Farmed) | 0.5 | 0.8 | 3.6 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 5.2 |
| Shellfish (Farmed) | 0.2 | 2.5 | 8.4 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 11.9 |
| Fish & Shellfish (Wild Catch) | 0.0 | 0.0 | 2.4 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 2.8 |
| Animal Fats | 2.0 | 2.4 | 1.2 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 6.7 |
| Buffalo Meat | 9.6 | 2.2 | 29.0 | 1.2 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 42.8 |
Source: Poore J., Nemecek T. (2018). Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers. Science.
- Average composition of diet:
To calculate the average environmental impact of a plant-based diet versus a diet with animal ingredients, researchers analyzed the quantities of food produced. The tables below show the average composition of plant-based and animal-based diets (in tons and percentage share).
Click here to view/hide Table 8
Table 8: Quantity of Produced Food (incl. Waste) – Plant-Based Products (in Tons and Percentage Share)
| Product | Weight (tons) | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Wheat & Rye (Bread) | 482,152 | 13% |
| Corn (Meal) | 194,554 | 5% |
| Barley (Beer) | 206,523 | 6% |
| Oatmeal | 4,463 | 0% |
| Rice | 397,780 | 11% |
| Potatoes | 332,343 | 9% |
| Cassava | 173,814 | 5% |
| Other Legumes | 42,765 | 1% |
| Peas | 6,026 | 0% |
| Nuts | 15,296 | 0% |
| Peanuts | 11,827 | 0% |
| Total | 3,677,839 | 100% |
Source: Knight A. (2023) The relative benefits for environmental sustainability of vegan diets for dogs, cats, and people, additional data from Poore and Nemecek (2018), Table S19.
Below in the table, the same data for animal-based products.
Click here to view/hide Table 9
Table 9: Quantity of Produced Food (including waste) – Animal-Based Products (in tons and share in percentage)
| Product | Weight (tons) | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Beef (Beef Farming) | 40,571 | 8% |
| Beef (Dairy Farming) | 31,425 | 6% |
| Lamb & Sheep Meat | 14,195 | 3% |
| Pork | 112,892 | 21% |
| Poultry | 96,439 | 18% |
| Cheese | 21,191 | 4% |
| Eggs | 63,489 | 12% |
| Fish (Farmed) | 45,223 | 9% |
| Shellfish (Farmed) | 10,633 | 2% |
| Fish & Shellfish (Wild-Caught) | 72,347 | 14% |
| Animal Fats | 10,599 | 2% |
| Buffalo Meat | 6,618 | 1% |
| Total | 525,622 | 100% |
Source: Knight A. (2023) The relative benefits for environmental sustainability of vegan diets for dogs, cats and people, additional data from Poore and Nemecek (2018), Table S19.
- The average climate warming impact of animal-based and plant-based ingredients
With the average impact of the ingredients and their respective shares, a weighted average can be calculated. For plant-based ingredients, the impact is 1.25 kg CO₂-eq, while for animal-based ingredients, it is 12.3 kg CO₂-eq.
To compare plant-based food and food with animal-based ingredients, it is important to know the average proportion of animal and plant-based ingredients in the diet.
- The average composition of food
According to the book Dog.Eat.Plant., the average dry food for dogs consists of 35% animal-based ingredients and 65% plant-based ingredients. Plant-based food, of course, consists entirely of plant-based ingredients (100%).
For cats, the proportion of animal-based ingredients is slightly higher, between 30% and 50%. For calculations, an average of 40% animal-based ingredients has been used.
In wet food, which generally contains more moisture, the proportion of animal-based ingredients is higher: between 40% and 75%. For calculations, an average of 58% animal-based ingredients has been used. No distinction has been made between wet food for dogs and cats.
Click here to view/hide Table 10
Table 10: Overview of the average composition of food for dogs and cats (dry food vs wet food)
| Pet | Dry or wet food? | Vegan food or not? | Animal ingredients in food | Plant-based ingredients in food |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dog | Dry food | Animal-based food | 35% | 65% |
| Dry food | Vegan food | 0% | 100% | |
| Wet food | Animal-based food | 58% | 43% | |
| Wet food | Vegan food | 0% | 100% | |
| Cat | Dry food | Animal-based food | 40% | 60% |
| Dry food | Vegan food | 0% | 100% | |
| Wet food | Animal-based food | 58% | 0% | |
| Wet food | Vegan food | 43% | 100% |
- Moisture content in food
The moisture content varies significantly between products. In the production of dry food, a large part of the moisture disappears during heating, resulting in an average kibble moisture content of 11%. In fresh meat, however, the moisture content at slaughter is around 70%. For plant-based ingredients, the moisture content can vary considerably. The moisture content has been determined per product, and a weighted average of 57% moisture has been calculated.
Meat, therefore, contains a lot of moisture. If dog kibble contains 35% meat ingredients, a much larger quantity of meat was needed than the weight present in the kibble. To determine how much meat was required, you have to work backward. For a 10-kilogram bag of kibble, as much as 10.6 kilograms of meat was needed.
Example calculation – view/hide
-
- For a 10-kilogram bag of dog kibble containing 35% meat, there is 3.5 kilograms of meat, from which 61% moisture has been removed. From the 70% moisture, only 9% remains in the kibble.
- For 3.5 kilograms of meat with 9% moisture, 10.6 kilograms of meat with 70% moisture was needed:
- 70% of 10.6 kilograms of meat consists of 7.4 kilograms of moisture and 3.2 kilograms of dry matter.
- 9% of 3.5 kilograms is 0.3 kilograms of moisture and also 3.2 kilograms of dry matter.
Thus, 10.6 kilograms of animal products were needed for a 10-kilogram bag of dog food with only 35% meat! (Source: Dog.Eat.Plant.)
- Calculation of climate impact
Now that we know the moisture content of different products, the share of animal and plant-based ingredients, and the average climate impact of these ingredients, the impact per kilogram can be calculated.
Calculation for food with animal ingredients
The calculation consists of two parts:
- From the animal ingredients
- From the plant-based ingredients
1. Calculation of the climate impact of animal ingredients
For average dog kibble containing animal ingredients, the following calculation can be made:
The meat in animal-based food had a moisture content of 70%. The dry matter content of meat is therefore 100% – 70% = 30%.
The kibble has a moisture content of 9%. The dry matter content is therefore 91%. This means that more than three times the amount of animal ingredients is needed (91% ÷ 30% = 3.03).
The percentage of animal ingredients in dog kibble is 35%. For one kilogram of dog food, you therefore need 0.35 kilograms x 3.03 = 1.06 kilograms of meat.
The impact of 1 kilogram of meat is 12.3 kg CO₂-eq. For 1.06 kilograms, the impact is therefore 1.06 x 12.3 = 13.1 kg CO₂-eq.
2. Calculation of the climate impact of plant-based ingredients
For the 65% plant-based ingredients, a similar calculation can be made: 100% – 57% = 43% dry matter.
Thus, 91% ÷ 43% = 2.11x as many plant-based ingredients are needed. For 1 kg of dog kibble, you need 0.65 kilograms x 2.11 = 1.37 kilograms of plant-based ingredients.
The impact of 1 kilogram of plant-based products is 1.25 kg CO₂-eq. For 1.37 kilograms, the impact is 1.37 x 1.25 = 1.71 kg CO₂-eq.
Climate impact of both animal and plant-based ingredients
The total impact of one kilogram of dog kibble with 35% meat and 65% plant-based ingredients is therefore 13.1 + 1.71 = 14.8 kg CO₂-eq.
Calculation for food with plant-based ingredients
The same calculation can be made for kibble with only plant-based ingredients. For this, you only need to calculate the amount of plant-based ingredients.
For 100% plant-based ingredients, we already saw that 2.11x as many plant-based ingredients are required. For 1 kg of dog kibble, you need 2.11 kilograms of plant-based ingredients.
The impact of 1 kilogram of plant-based products is 1.25 kg CO₂-eq. For 2.11 kilograms, the impact is 2.11 x 1.25 = 2.6 kg CO₂-eq.
Calculation of the difference between food with animal and plant-based ingredients
The difference between average dog kibble with animal ingredients and dog kibble with plant-based ingredients is therefore 14.8 – 2.6 = 12.2 kg CO₂-eq per kilogram. By choosing plant-based dog kibble instead of kibble with animal ingredients, you save 12.2 kg CO₂-eq per kilogram.
5.3 What does kg CO₂-eq. mean?
To better understand the impact of CO₂ equivalents (CO₂-eq), this can be compared to the emissions of a passenger car. A car emits an average of
0.149 kg CO₂ per kilometer driven
(Source: Milieu Centraal).
The 12.2 kg CO₂-eq saved by choosing one kilogram of plant-based dog kibble instead of kibble with animal ingredients is equivalent to a car covering a distance of: 12.2 kg CO₂-eq ÷ 0.149 kg CO₂ per km ≈ 82 kilometers.
In other words, choosing one kilogram of plant-based dog kibble saves as much CO₂ as the emissions from a car trip of 82 kilometers.
6. Overview of Your Impact
The table below contains the key results of the calculations, based on the assumptions explained above. These results have been applied to all VegaVriend products.
Click here to view/hide Table 11
Table 11: Overview of CO₂ savings when using plant-based pet food versus pet food with animal ingredients
| Aspect | Unit | Dog Food (Dry) | Dog Food (Wet) | Cat Food (Dry) | Cat Food (Wet) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of animals saved with vegan option vs. animal-based variant | n / 100 kcal | 0.00461 | 0.00461 | 0.0306 | 0.0306 |
| Climate impact – animal-based variant | kg CO2-eq. / kg | 14.8 | 6.2 | 16.6 | 6.2 |
| Climate impact – plant-based variant | kg CO2-eq. / kg | 2.6 | 0.7 | 2.6 | 0.7 |
| Climate savings plant-based vs. animal-based variant | kg CO2-eq. / kg | 12.2 | 5.5 | 13.9 | 5.5 |
| Climate savings plant-based vs. animal-based variant | car km / kg | 82 | 37 | 93 | 37 |
7. Do You Have Questions About Our Calculations? Contact Us!
Do you have any questions or would you like to know more about our calculations? Feel free to contact us! We are always ready to help you. You can reach us via our contact page.
Share article
