People often make the effects of climate options incorrect – such as a dog owner – study

It suggests that many people are not great in recognizing which personal decisions contribute the most to climate change – and some those who do may come as a surprise.

A Recently published study It was found by the National Academy of Sciences that when the action is asked to rank, such as swaping a car, which uses gasoline for an electric, to reduce or reduce food waste, a US -US participants were not very accurate while assessing how much those actions have contributed to climate change, which have contributed to climate change, which caused the renovation, which is due to the renovation of the Greenhouse gas, which has contributed to the climate change, when the renovation of the Greenhouses has contributed to the climate change, when the glory changes have contributed to the climate change. Fuel is oil and coal.

“People actually reduce very low-impact tasks such as recycling, and to reduce the actual carbon effect of behavior very low effects, such as flying or eating,” Reporting environmental social science co-author and professor at the University of Stanford in California.

Top three individual actions that help climate, in which the three were also underestimated to avoid aircraft flights, do not obtain dogs and use renewable lightning. Meanwhile, the lowest-effect actions were turning into more efficient devices and lighting light bulbs, recycling, and using low energy when washing clothes. Three of the top four were at the top in the report.

Vlasceanu stated that marketing focuses more on recycling and uses energy-efficient light bulbs, which is relatively bad for climate by flights or dogs, so participants were more likely to give more weight to those tasks.

How the human brain is wired also plays a role.

“You can see the bottle recycling. It appears. While carbon emissions, it is invisible to the human eye. So we do not add emissions with flight,” said Ziaing Zhao, said, which teach psychology and stability at the British Columbia University.

Jhao said that it is easy to bring action to attention that we do more often. “Recycling is an almost daily action, while the flight is often low. It is less discussed,” he said. “As a result, people give a high psychological weight for recycling.”

Of course, there is also a lot of misleading information.

For example, some companies explain the recycling that they do, while the public does not tell about pollution that comes from their overall operations.

“There is a lot of intentional confusion, which is actually to support the old policies,” Branda Ekavurjel said, a climate scientist of the non-profit association of the concerned scientists.

Pets, flight and other climate change contributor

Dogs are large meat eaters, and meat is an important contributor to climate change. This is because many farm animals, which will become food, will leave methane, a greenhouse gas that contributes to climate change. Beef is particularly impressive, in part because cattle around the world are often raised on the ground which was illegally deprived. Since trees absorb carbon dioxide, the most abundant greenhouse gas, then lifting cattle to cut them is a double vaimi.

“People do not just connect pets with carbon emissions. This link is not clear in the minds of the people,” Jhao said.

However, not all pets are the same. Zhao owns a dog and three rabbits.

“I can adopt 100 Banni who will not be close to a dog’s emission, because my dog is a non -vegetarian,” he said.

The owners of the meat -eating pet can reduce their effects in search of food made from sources other than beef. For example, it tries to reduce its dog’s carbon footprint by feeding its low carbon-intensive protein sources, including shatter, seafood and Türkiye.

Plains emit lots of carbon dioxide and nitrogen oxide, as well as contraceptives, or vapor trails that prevent planetary-warming gases from running into space. According to the International Civil Aviation Organization, a United Nations Agency, a round-trip economy-class flight at 737 from New York produces more than 1,300 pounds (590 kg) per passenger.

Leaving that single flight, swearing to eat all types of meat in a year saves more carbon, or stays without a car for more than three months, United Nations estimates,

Learn from mistakes

Some of the largest climate decisions can include individuals how they warm and cool their homes and types of transport they use. Switching on renewable energy reduces the effects of both.

Recycling is effective in reducing waste for landfill, but its climate effect is relatively small as transportation, processing and resurrection of recycles usually depends on fossil fuels. In addition, according to the Environmental Protection Agency, less than 10 percent of plastics actually get recycled.

Other decisions with more effects, including washing clothes in cold water and switching on more efficient light bulbs, are relatively less important. This is because those devices have a relatively low effect than things such as aircraft flights, so it has to improve them while beneficial, much more limited effects.

Experts say that the best way to combat the misconception of climate effects is with more easily available information. The study supports that hypothesis. After the participants finished the ranking action, the researchers corrected their mistakes, and they said what tasks they change that they take to help the planet.

“People learn from these interventions,” Vlasceanu said. “After learning, they are actually committed to more impressive tasks.”