A dog’s dinner can carry a larger climate footprint than many owners realize. In some cases, meat-heavy pet foods may generate more climate-warming emissions per meal than a person’s own diet.
In the UK, researchers estimate that ingredients used in commercial dog food account for about one percent of national greenhouse gas emissions.
A team led by Dr. John Harvey at the University of Edinburgh built a model that estimates climate impact without relying on confidential recipes.
The model reveals how choices about meat cuts, food format, and marketing claims can quietly shape emissions in dogs’ bowls.
Not all dog foods are equal
Across 996 products, the researchers found that emissions linked to ingredients ranged widely, with some foods scoring 65 times higher than others.
“Our research shows just how large and variable the climate impact of dog food really is,” said Dr. Harvey.
That spread means two dogs of similar size can drive very different levels of pollution, even when both seem well fed.
Meat choices shape emissions
When the researchers compared foods by calories, wet and raw diets usually produced higher emissions than standard dry kibble.
Because these foods contain fewer calories per ounce, dogs must eat more each day, which scales up the emissions tied to ingredient production.
Dry foods that were not marketed as grain-free generally ranked lower, though results still varied by brand.
Much of the difference traced back to meat choices. Products built around prime cuts like chicken breast or beef steak drove some of the highest emissions, while foods using more animal by-products – such as organs and trimmings people rarely buy – tended to have a smaller climate footprint.
That contrast matters, since global farm data consistently show that most animal products emit more climate-warming gases than plant-based alternatives.
The cost of grain-free
Not every pound of an animal carries the same climate weight, so researchers must decide how to share emissions across different cuts.
The study compared economic allocation – which divides impacts based on each cut’s market value – with mass-based methods that spread emissions by weight alone.
Those choices can significantly change results, and the authors argue that prices better capture which meats actually drive livestock production.
That accounting matters for what ends up in dog food. Products marketed as grain-free often replace grains with extra meat or legumes, which can raise emissions in some formulas.
In the UK sample, grain-free dry and wet foods generally ranked higher in climate impact than their standard counterparts, suggesting that marketing claims can shift ingredient demand even when products meet the same nutritional standards.
Dogs digest more than meat
A meat-only story misses how dogs adapted alongside humans, including the ability to handle starch in many everyday diets.
In 2013, a genetics study found domestic dogs carry extra gene copies for breaking down starch compared with wolves.
That biology helps explain why lower-meat formulas can still work, as long as they deliver complete protein, fats, and minerals.
Labels that steer demand
Ingredient descriptions like beef steak or chicken fillet can signal human-edible cuts, while terms like offal point to lower-demand parts.
Because labels rarely state exact percentages, the team inferred likely recipes from listed order and nutrient ranges on packaging.
That kind of decoding turns ingredient wording into a practical signal, even when shoppers never see farm-level numbers.
What owners can change
Dog owners who want to cut climate impact without switching food formats can start by reading ingredient lists carefully, especially the wording around meat cuts.
Foods built around lower-demand parts of the carcass tend to carry lower emissions because they avoid increasing demand for human-edible prime cuts.
Any diet change should still meet a dog’s health needs, so guidance from a veterinarian can be important, particularly for older or medically sensitive animals.
Many of the biggest levers, however, sit with manufacturers. The authors urge companies to use more animal parts that people rarely eat and to pair those choices with clear, transparent ingredient labeling.
“These steps can help us have healthy, well-fed dogs with a smaller pawprint on the planet,” said Harvey, noting that better labeling would also help buyers see past vague sustainability claims on packaging.
Millions of bowls matter
At a global scale, feeding dogs with UK-style food could generate between 517 and 873 million tons of climate-warming emissions each year – roughly 59 to 99 percent of the emissions from burning jet fuel in commercial flights.
That comparison highlights how everyday household choices can quickly add up when millions of dogs consume similar products.
The model behind these estimates focused only on ingredient production, leaving out emissions from factories, transport, retail, and waste.
Wet foods typically require more packaging per calorie, while raw diets often depend on energy-intensive cold storage.
Because those factors were not included, real-world emissions are likely higher, especially for foods that travel long distances or remain refrigerated.
Feeding dogs with less impact
Lower-impact options already exist, but the study found that only a small number of plant-based products were available for detailed scoring.
Because these foods avoid most meat ingredients, their emissions were generally lower, and one insect-based product also ranked well.
Overall, the findings show that a dog food’s climate footprint depends more on ingredients and format than on brand price.
Clearer labeling, more complete accounting of packaging and transport, and a wider range of low-meat options would help owners and veterinarians compare nutrition and climate impact side by side, instead of relying on marketing claims alone.
The study is published in the Journal of Cleaner Production.
—–
Like what you read? Subscribe to our newsletter for engaging articles, exclusive content, and the latest updates.
Check us out on EarthSnap, a free app brought to you by Eric Ralls and Earth.com.
—–
link