Dogs are family, and for many of us that means choosing the “best” food we can afford, often the kind packed with meat, marketed as premium, and made to look closer to what a wolf might eat. But a new study suggests that this well-meaning upgrade can come with a surprising trade-off. In some cases, a dog’s diet may generate a bigger carbon footprint than the person filling the bowl.
Researchers from the University of Edinburgh and the University of Exeter looked at the emissions linked to producing ingredients used in almost a thousand different dog foods. The range included dry kibble, wet food, raw options, plant-based recipes, and grain-free formulas. What they found was not a small difference between products but a huge gap, with some foods linked to dramatically higher emissions than others.
The biggest divide showed up between meat-heavy choices and more conventional dry foods. Wet, raw, and high-meat diets tended to carry much higher climate impacts than dry kibble. Overall, the researchers reported differences so wide that certain foods were associated with up to 65 times more emissions than others, depending on ingredients and production demands.
The grain-free trend also came under scrutiny. According to the findings, grain-free dog foods generally had a larger carbon footprint than those that included grains. Meanwhile, plant-based options reduced emissions, showing that swapping even part of a dog’s diet toward lower-impact ingredients could make a meaningful difference, especially when multiplied across millions of pets.
Zooming out, the study suggests that ingredients used for dog food in the United Kingdom account for around one percent of the country’s total greenhouse gas emissions. The researchers added an even sharper comparison, saying that if dogs worldwide were fed in the same way as dogs in the UK, the resulting emissions would be roughly half of those produced by fuel burned for all commercial flights in a year. It is a reminder that everyday routines, even ones that feel small, can add up fast.
John Harvey, who led the team at the University of Edinburgh, said he often sees owners caught between the idea that dogs need a very meat-forward diet and the desire to live more lightly on the planet. His takeaway was straightforward. The climate impact of dog food is both substantial and highly variable, which means choices at the shelf really do matter.
The researchers are also calling for clearer labeling from pet food makers, so owners can better understand what they are buying and what it implies. If you have ever wondered whether the “premium” pick is always the best pick, this is a good moment to look at ingredients with fresh eyes. What changes, if any, would you make to your dog’s diet to balance nutrition and sustainability? Share your thoughts in the comments.
