The Drawdown proposals are global and well referenced. The point of this study is to outline and set achievable goals and to avoid major efforts in the wrong direction. Some of the findings are surprising. Some apply more than others to western cultures. For example, it is true that poorer countries waste less, but that is offset by the extraordinary food waste of countries like Canada and the US. At least 40% of the food produced here is wasted. That needs to change and doing so is totally possible. Food waste is ranked high due to the potential savings if addressed.
#3 Reducing food waste
70.53 GIGATONS REDUCED CO2
GLOBAL COST AND SAVINGS DATA TOO VARIABLE TO BE DETERMINED
IMPACT: After taking into account the adoption of plant-rich diets, if 50 percent of food waste is reduced by 2050, avoided emissions could be equal to 26.2 gigatons of carbon dioxide. Reducing waste also avoids the deforestation for additional farmland, preventing 44.4 gigatons of additional emissions. We used forecasts of regional waste estimated from farm to household. This data shows that up to 35 percent of food in high-income economies is thrown out by consumers; in low-income economies, however, relatively little is wasted at the household level.
The issues of women's education directly correlate to family planning. More people means a larger problem for all to deal with.
#7 Family planning
51.48 GIGATONS REDUCED CO2
SEE IMPACT BELOW
IMPACT: Increased adoption of reproductive healthcare and family planning is an essential component to achieve the United Nations’ 2015 medium global population projection of 9.7 billion people by 2050. If investment in family planning, particularly in low-income countries, does not materialize, the world’s population could come closer to the high projection, adding another 1 billion people to the planet. We model the impact of this solution based on the difference in how much energy, building space, food, waste, and transportation would be used in a world with little to no investment in family planning, compared to one in which the projection of 9.7 billion is realized. The resulting emissions reductions could be 102.96 gigatons of carbon dioxide, at an average annual cost of $10.77 per user in low-income countries. Because educating girls has an important impact on the use of family planning, we allocate 50 percent of the total potential emissions reductions to each solution—51.48 gigatons a piece.
https://www.drawdown.org/solutions/women-and-girls/family-planning
One surprise to me was the impact of refrigeration. It's a huge, but totally addressable problem with current technology.
#1 Refrigeration Management
89.74 GIGATONS REDUCED CO2
DATA TOO VARIABLE TO BE DETERMINED
$-902.77 BILLION
NET OPERATIONAL SAVINGS
IMPACT: Our analysis includes emissions reductions that can be achieved through the management and destruction of refrigerants already in circulation. Over thirty years, containing 87 percent of refrigerants likely to be released could avoid emissions equivalent to 89.7 gigatons of carbon dioxide. Phasing out HFCs per the Kigali accord could avoid additional emissions equivalent to 25 to 78 gigatons of carbon dioxide (not included in the total shown here). The operational costs of refrigerant leak avoidance and destruction are high, resulting in a projected net cost of $903 billion by 2050.
https://www.drawdown.org/solutions/materials/refrigerant-management