Although the output of GHG in terms of grams is only 7% of US total, for food waste those grams would predominantly be methane and nitrous oxide, which have much higher warming potentials.

Ceasing the burning of fossil fuels would be significant. But stopping organic matter from decomposing in a landfill would also be significant — and it’s currently feasible and scalable.

https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.compostingcouncil.org/resource/res...

Thanks for the info and source!

Food is produced primarily with fossil fuels.

> The American food supply is driven almost entirely by non-renewable energy sources and accounts for approximately 19% of the total use of fossil fuels in the United States.

https://sustainability.emory.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/...

Buying local and eating less meat is social signalling. Wasting less food is making personal sacrifices for the environment.

Your own source doesn't agree. On page 3 it says:

"What you can do: - Buy foods grown locally - Avoid purchasing processed foods - Cut back on meat"

I understand that GHGs are emitted in producing, shipping, refrigerating, and disposing of the wasted food. I am 100% for reducing waste, but we have bigger fish to fry than biodegradable food waste.

I'm not sure the food waste is referring to solid waste, but the emissions produced (fuel and electrcity) in producing/shipping/storing/delivering food that is not actually used.