I\u2019ve been a vegetarian for over a decade. It\u2019s not because of my health, or because I dislike the taste of chicken or beef: It\u2019s a lifestyle choice I made because I wanted to reduce my impact on the planet. And yet, twice a day, every day, I lovingly scoop a cup of meat-based kibble into a bowl and set it down for my 50-pound rescue dog, a husky mix named Loki.<\/p>\n
Until recently, I hadn\u2019t devoted a huge amount of thought to that paradox. Then I read an article<\/a> in the Associated Press headlined \u201cPeople often miscalculate climate choices, a study says. One surprise is owning a dog.\u201d<\/p>\n The study<\/a>, led by environmental psychology researcher Danielle Goldwert and published in the journal PNAS Nexus, examined how people perceive the climate impact of various behaviors \u2014 options like \u201cadopt a vegan diet for at least one year,\u201d or \u201cshift from fossil fuel car to renewable public transport.\u201d The team found that participants generally overestimated a number of low-impact actions like recycling and using efficient appliances, and they vastly underestimated the impact of other personal decisions, including the decision to \u201cnot purchase or adopt a dog.\u201d<\/p>\n The real objective of the study was to see whether certain types of climate information could help people commit to more effective actions. But mere hours after the AP published its article, its aim had been recast as something else entirely: an attack on people\u2019s furry family members. \u201cClimate change is actually your fault because you have a dog,\u201d one Reddit user wrote.<\/a> Others in the community chimed in with ire, ridiculing the idea that a pet Chihuahua could be driving the climate crisis and calling on researchers and the media to stop pointing fingers at everyday individuals.<\/p>\n