Compare your food
Chicken vs lentils
Chicken is the lowest-impact common meat. Lentils are a staple plant protein. How close are they?
Sample data. The figures and sources on this page are demonstration records showing how evidence will be presented. They are approximate and have not yet been through our review process. Read about how we will verify evidence.
Greenhouse gas emissions
kg CO₂e per 100 g proteinChicken has about 1.9 times the emissions of Lentils, so Lentils has the lower impact here.
All greenhouse gases released producing the food, from land clearing to retail, expressed as carbon dioxide equivalents.
Land use
m² per 100 g proteinLentils has about 3.7 times the land of Chicken, so Chicken has the lower impact here.
Farmland needed to produce the food, including grazing and land for animal feed.
Water pollution (eutrophication)
g PO₄e per 100 g proteinChicken has about 2.8 times the pollution of Lentils, so Lentils has the lower impact here.
Nutrient run-off from fertiliser and manure that causes algal blooms and dead zones, in phosphate equivalents.
Protein
g per 100 g proteinChicken and Lentils are about the same.
Protein content of the food as eaten.
Fibre
g per 100 g proteinLentils contains fibre; Chicken contains none.
Dietary fibre. Animal foods contain none.
Saturated fat
g per 100 g proteinChicken has about 2.9 times the sat. fat of Lentils, so Lentils has the lower impact here.
Saturated fat content. Higher intakes raise LDL cholesterol.
Animals slaughtered
animals per 100 g proteinChicken involves slaughtered animals; Lentils involves none.
Approximate number of animals slaughtered for this amount of food. Small fractions mean one animal yields many portions. Zero for plant foods; dairy and eggs involve animals indirectly.
Methodology, sources and caveats
- Environmental values are averages per kilogram of food as eaten, converted to the basis you choose. Farms vary widely around these averages; thin lines on the bars show the reported range where the source gives one.
- Where a food has figures for more than one country or production system, the default is the all-systems figure for your country (or the global average). The figure menu under a chart lets you choose another; the source and geography update with it.
- Nutrient values are reference composition figures. Preparation and variety change them, and absorption differs between plant and animal sources (see the nutrient panel).
- No single metric tells the whole story. A food can score well on emissions and poorly on water, or well on protein and poorly on fibre.
- Freshwater use: Water use matters mainly where water is scarce. A litre in a rainy region is not equivalent to a litre in a drought-prone one, so treat this as indicative only.
- Scarcity-weighted water use: Scarcity weighting depends on where each food is actually grown. Global figures blend many regions; country figures are shown where a source provides them.
- Animals slaughtered: Dairy and eggs are shown as zero because no animal is slaughtered per unit sold, but both systems involve animals; this metric only counts direct slaughter.
- Lentils: Cooked weight. Dry lentils roughly triple in weight when cooked.
Sources: Poore et al. (2018); Service (2024); Nations (2024). See how we rate evidence.
In short, per 100 g of protein
- Chicken has about 1.9 times the emissions of Lentils, so Lentils has the lower impact here.
- Lentils has about 3.7 times the land of Chicken, so Chicken has the lower impact here.
- Chicken has about 2.8 times the pollution of Lentils, so Lentils has the lower impact here.
- Chicken and Lentils are about the same.
- Lentils contains fibre; Chicken contains none.
- Chicken has about 2.9 times the sat. fat of Lentils, so Lentils has the lower impact here.
- Chicken involves slaughtered animals; Lentils involves none.
Change the basis above to see how the picture shifts by serving, weight or calorie. Build your own comparison in the full tool.