Eco impact of food - new traffic light system

Impact of food on green house gases

Assuming the cost is similar, most of us would like to be greener but often it’s unclear what the best course of action is. The food we eat is responsible for over one third of greenhouse gas emissions so understanding the impact of specific foods is a good place to start.

Carbon footprint of foods

The table below shows the carbon footprint of foods per kilogram.

Minced beef	21
Cheddar cheese	14.2
Pork chops	5.8
Chicken brest	4.1
Cucumbers	2.2
Full fat milk	1.9
Tomatoes	1.8
Tofu	1.3
Avocados	1.1
Bananas	0.5
Carrots	0.4
Apples	0.3

(source CarbonCloud kgCO2eq/kg).

Surprisingly, the numbers suggest that food items such as bananas have a lower carbon footprint than we might expect. The basic fact is that emissions at the farm stage typically dwarf those for processes like transport and packaging.

Probably like me though you are still a bit sceptical - is importing all those avocados really OK? We need to analyse the whole supply chain and a lot of factors other than greenhouse gas emissions. To assess the eco impact of a can of beer I would need to understand the agricultural, the malting, the brewing, the packaging, the distribution, the storage, and the disposal / recycling processes in detail.

Food traffic light system

A new traffic light system for the eco impact of food is currently being trialled. This will rate products from A to G / green to red. The scheme is overseen by Foundation Earth an independent not for profit organisation which is backed by major industry players in the UK and EU. There will be a single eco impact score, but this is derived from assessing carbon emissions, water usage, water pollution and biodiversity at each supply chain stage.

There are some on-going issues. Some large companies want to use carbon offsetting – they invest, for example, in forestation and then want to apply these numbers to reduce the eco score of specific food products. If this isn’t allowed, they argue, then the eco impact isn’t rewarding companies who are serious about a net zero target. The disposal and recycling cost is also currently excluded on the basis that there are other ways of addressing this.

Another problem is that something like a beef product may always have an overall red eco impact, but most people would still like to know which beef product is the most sustainable.

So, the new scheme is not perfect but a big step forward. We will all get much better visibility, and the labelling will drive significant product innovation as most supermarkets and manufacturers will not want to have too many red scores on their products.