cork leather vs leather: Protein

cork leather: 0 g / 100 g. leather: 0 g / 100 g.

cork leather vs leather: Climate impact

cork leather: 1.5 kg CO₂e / kg. leather: 17 kg CO₂e / kg.

cork leather vs leather: Water use

cork leather: 50 L / kg. leather: 17000 L / kg.

cork leather vs leather: Land use

cork leather: 1 m² / kg. leather: 160 m² / kg.

cork leather vs leather: Saturated fat

cork leather: 0 g / 100 g. leather: 0 g / 100 g.

cork leather vs leather: Fibre

cork leather: 0 g / 100 g. leather: 0 g / 100 g.

Compare

cork leather vs leather

How cork leather and leather compare on protein, climate impact, water use, land use, saturated fat and fibre — with a clear verdict.

Compare

The numbers

The numbers	cork leather	leather
Protein (g / 100 g)	0	0
Climate impact (kg CO₂e / kg)	1.5	17
Water use (L / kg)	50	17000
Land use (m² / kg)	1	160
Saturated fat (g / 100 g)	0	0
Fibre (g / 100 g)	0	0

The verdict

cork leather is the better everyday choice. It uses less land and water and carries a smaller carbon footprint than leather, while covering the same role on the plate. If protein density is your priority, adjust portion size rather than going back to leather.

Sources: Poore & Nemecek (Science, 2018), FAO, USDA FoodData Central, Mekonnen & Hoekstra (2011).

oat milk vs almond milk →soya milk vs cow's milk →tofu vs chicken →lentils vs beef →tempeh vs beef →seitan vs chicken →

All comparisons

Keep going

Is it vegan? →Vegan swaps →Vegan city guides →

Newsletter

One short letter. Once a month.

A handful of recipes, a story worth your time, and one thing you can do this week. Nothing else.

We never share your email. Unsubscribe in one click.