Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Grocery and Restaurant Items to Have Carbon Labels

Give me a friggin break...

Remember those halcyon days when we knew nothing of trans fats in potato chips or the sugar count of our Cocoa Puffs? Now there's another issue to agonize over as you scour the back of the cereal box: carbon footprints.

Consumers in the U.K. are already eating carbon-quantified crisps, thanks to a new pilot project aimed at assessing the total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of a grocery item, from raw material production and manufacturing through to distribution and disposal.

Walkers, a PepsiCo company, has since agreed to assign labels to all its chips, but the numbers won't mean much to consumers until more companies sign up for the program. As of late September, about a dozen more had joined the program, among them Cadbury Schweppes and Coca-Cola, which should give the project some legs.

The challenge, of course, is to develop standards that are meaningful�easy for the consumer to understand, rigorous enough to endure scrutiny and universal enough to apply to thousands of different products.

Here in North America, we've been slower to jump on the carbon bandwagon, even though a recent study shows that nearly 50% of consumers are willing to pay a 10% to 30% premium for food from supply chains that emit half as much greenhouse gas as conventional chains.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/article789756.ece

Ignorance is bliss....

There will be carbon footprint labeling on most products soon.

Walmart, McDonalds, Taco Bell and others notified their suppliers more than a year ago to prepare for it. Their customers are wanting to make choices that are helathy for themselves and for the planet, so retailers are going to give them the info...

Lots of food processors have signed on to DOE and EPA's energy leadership program to reduce energy use by 25% in 10 years, and by 50% in 20 years. Energy reduction is largely carbong reduction, but carbon also includes tillage (low till or multiple passes over the ground), fertilizer (pesticide and herbicide) use, packaging, transporation, and recyclability. Basically all inputs, cradle to grave.

And all it does is increase cost for nothing..................

Beans create greenhouse gas, oh my what will the veggies eat?

I bet theres a lot of 'peanut-butter' accounting that takes place in the numbers they post on the label. You know, get a big wad of peanut butter on a knife, spread it on the bread, and you can make it look like anything you want....

The company I work for has spent a ton of money upgrading boilers, air compressors, ammonia compressors, all with the justification of energy savings. If the savings wasn't there though, it wouldn't have happened.

yep, if it ain't economical, it's less than practical. but, the big-money corporates are enlisting the aid of free-market lawyers to slow the process down.

what might happen if we stopped planting kentucky 31 fescue, and went back to the ancient art of planting trees??

planting trees, say it ain't so.

I may begin making it a point - and saying so aloud - that I'm buying the highest carbon footprint items I can find. Specifically to counter all this hysterical blather.

Absolutely- more government regulation = more cost.

All this stuff is really stupid if you ask me.

they are complaining bout the carbon footprint of your pets now too.....i chit you not:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/2987848/Save-the-planet-time-to-eat-dog

They can suck my dogz arss.

I have no interest in carbon Footprint info on my food labels..I wonder how many peoplethat say they do.. really do if they knew that their food costs will just increase further for the same product.