Photo: clayirving, Flickr.
Taking steps to suppress global warming, new food labels on restaurant menus and grocery products in Sweden indicate the carbon dioxide emissions involved in the food's creation, from fast-food burgers to fresh produce, the New York Times reports. Similar to the nutritional information listed on packaging, the carbon footprint of a product is listed as follows: "Climate declared: ___ kg CO2 per kg of product."
A 2005 national study in Sweden -- leaders in the quest to reduce one's carbon footprint -- determined that 25 percent of the country's carbon emissions was traced to food production and eating, according to the Times. Experts believe that strictly abiding by these new guidelines could reduce their culinary carbon footprint by as much as 25 to 50 percent.
For those already struggling with the health ramifications of nutritional information, the additional factor of climate consideration may appear daunting -- especially when there are revealed to be different, convoluted facets of eating local. How many people can assuredly differentiate produce that can be grown outdoors versus those that necessitate the extra energy of heated greenhouses?
Made public last summer, dietary suggestions advise Swedes to account for the greenhouse gas emissions associated with a variety of foods as well as the global availability of certain produce, the paper said.. For example, fish is cautioned for consumption due to the deficiency of its stock in Europe, chicken is preferable over red meat due to lower greenhouse gas emissions needed to grow poultry, vegetables that can be grown outdoors -- like carrots -- are encouraged over produce requiring the use of heated greenhouses, like tomatoes or cucumbers.
And that's not all -- the emissions impacts of fresh produce vary even further, depending on everything from the location and practices of heterogeneous farms to the soil they're grown in -- factors virtually alien to the average consumer.
People may think considering environmental guidelines for food to be extreme, but the Nutrition Department at the Swedish National Food Administration -- tasked with creating the new eating guidelines that consider climate as much as nutritional information -- argues that it's a move that's equally important as switching to hybrid cars or energy-efficient washing machines.
[Via New York Times]
10-24-2009 @4:20AM SnoopyManiac said... HEY!!! I have an idea... if all the Swedes starve themselves... no more carbon footprint from food!!!
Wait... What's the carbon footprint of a corpse?
Reply
10-26-2009 @2:01PM superfresh said... It appears they fail to notice that plants, especially orchards offset carbon dioxide from the millions of trees.
Reply
10-26-2009 @2:16PM Patrick said... Gonna ignore snoopy's comment entirely, but superfresh, I dont think I understand your either. "orchards offset carbon dioxide from the millions of trees." ??? orchards are trees, or rather, groups of them. and trees don't produce carbon dioxide, they consume it. might you elucidate your train of thought for me?
Reply
10-26-2009 @7:56PM elky999 said... Patrick,
My sentence made no sense, I apologize. My point is, yes, orchards consume carbon dioxide, thus offsetting the carbon dioxide that is used to transport them.
Reply
10-29-2009 @1:33PM Tracey said... What would make this really useful is if they factored in how many calories and what percent of major nutrition needs were met by the meal. It's all well and good if your plate of apples is tremendously low in emissions, but how many plates of it are you going to have to eat to get the nutrition someone eating meat is getting? If you have to eat 10 apples, or 15 and still don't have all the needs met, the difference is going to be a lot less than just the straight comparison of emissions would lead you to believe.
Reply