A new study finds many Americans misjudge which actions impact climate change, with surprising data on dogs' carbon pawprints.
A new study shows many Americans are focusing on the wrong actions when it comes to combating climate change, and one surprising finding has sparked debate among dog owners.
Researchers asked participants to rank everyday actions by their impact on greenhouse gas emissions. The study recently published by the National Academy of Sciences found that people often overestimate the benefits of small, visible steps such as recycling and underestimate the emissions from larger lifestyle choices, including flying, using renewable energy and owning a dog.
"Installing a smart meter, reducing food waste, carpooling, recycling, these are things that are in our everyday actions," said Brenda Ekwurzel, a climate scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists. "It is understandable that what we are most familiar with, we hope they do more than they actually do to solve the overall problem."
The study found that owning a dog is among the top three personal lifestyle choices contributing to greenhouse gas emissions. The reason is diet.
Most dogs eat meat-heavy meals, and the production of meat, especially beef, generates significant emissions. Livestock release methane, a potent greenhouse gas, and cattle are often raised on land cleared through deforestation, which removes trees that absorb carbon dioxide.
"You can lower the carbon footprint of owning your dog if you make their diet more chicken- or fish-based," Ekwurzel said. "Proteins that are quicker to grow have a lower fossil fuel impact in their production."
Not all pets have the same impact.
Herbivores like rabbits have far smaller emissions footprints, while cats typically contribute less than larger dogs, but are still carnivores.
For Raleigh dog owner Phil Miller, the findings were unexpected.
"I really never considered it too much," Miller said. "But I think climate change is way more of a human problem than a pet problem."
While the dog statistic is drawing attention online, experts say the research highlights a broader point: many people underestimate their highest-impact activities.
A round-trip flight from New York to Los Angeles produces more than 1,300 pounds of emissions per passenger, according to the International Civil Aviation Organization. Skipping one flight can save as much carbon as giving up meat for an entire year or living without a car for more than three months.
Switching to renewable electricity, such as solar or wind, also ranked among the highest-impact personal changes in the study.
Ekwurzel said personal actions play an important role but often intersect with broader systems.
"We have to remove the barriers to personal choice," she said. "The systemic change is the biggest change that can be made in your local community, your state, the nation and internationally."
She also said individual behavior can influence companies and policymakers.
"When we change our personal behavior by buying something or not buying something in a corporate setting, that does send signals," Ekwurzel said. "Personal choices only get us so far, yet those personal choices send signals to those who are making those systemic choices."
In North Carolina, where extreme heat, stronger storms, and shifting weather patterns have brought climate risks closer to home, scientists say understanding where individual actions fit into the larger picture is increasingly relevant.
State legislators recently removed the interim carbon-cutting deadline for utilities to reduce emissions by 70% by 2030.
Miller said he believes policy and industry decisions carry more weight than personal lifestyle choices.
"Policy and regulating the grid have a way bigger impact," Miller said. "Your individual impact is not that big. That does not mean we should not try, but it is going to take bigger changes than just me and you recycling."
Researchers said the goal of the study is not to discourage small personal actions but to help people understand which ones make the biggest difference.
Avoiding flights, using renewable energy and reducing meat consumption ranked highest, while switching lightbulbs, washing clothes in cold water and recycling ranked much lower.
Ekwurzel said more information could help consumers make informed decisions.
"I do not always have a choice, and the food I buy is not labeled for its climate impact," Ekwurzel said. "We do not yet have labels to tell us what the climate-friendly options are."
The study also found that once participants learned which actions carried the most weight, many said they would shift their behavior toward the bigger-impact choices.