Close Ad

The Spoon

Daily news and analysis about the food tech revolution

climate change

GreenSwapp Wants to Make Figuring Out the Climate Impact of a Bag of Chips as Easy as Snapping a Pic

While the climate impact of our food has finally made the main stage as a topic at the world’s most high-profile summit, the average joe has no idea how good or bad that bag of chips or can of soda is for the environment.

A Dutch startup called GreenSwapp wants to change that by making information about the climate impact of practically any CPG product instantly available to anyone using its technology.

The Amsterdam-based company started as an online grocery app for climate-friendly products, but more recently has focused on building a climate impact data platform for both consumers and companies. To that end, the company debuted a new scanning tool at CES which gives instant scoring (low, medium, or high impact) of practically any packaged food product when the product’s barcode is scanned with a smartphone.

Here’s how it works: Curious about the climate impact of a tub of yogurt? Head to the GreenSwapp website (www.greenswapp.com) with a mobile browser, and at the top of the page, click on the bar code scan symbol. Your phone will ask you if scan.greenswapp.com can use your camera. Click yes and scan away.

Once a product is scanned, GreenSwapp will show a score and an estimate of how much of your daily carbon footprint a serving of the product eats up. Below that, you’ll see a breakdown in a “climate deep dive” that shows where that carbon was emitted.

Above: Scan of Brown Cow Maple Yogurt with Greenswapp.com Scanning Tool

So how does GreenSwapp figure all of this out? According to company CEO Ajay Varadharajan, they factor in estimates of carbon output for each food for every part of the product’s journey to our plates.

We “go through the entire journey of every food product, the impact of processing, the impact of transportation, the impact of packaging, and then we display it as a single number on a single color for the consumer to be able to understand if it’s good or bad,” he said.

While the web tool is something I’m sure some climate-conscious consumers would save as a browser favorite, I’d be more likely to make GreenSwapp a part of my daily routine if it was a discrete app or integrated as a feature on one of my online grocery apps. While GreenSwapp’s current app is only available for grocery shopping in the Netherlands, the company has an open API that any online grocery or delivery company can use to integrate Greenswapp’s data into its offering.

But will they? While most grocers don’t offer climate change impact data, my guess is it’s only a matter of time. There is already a discussion of having climate impact data on food labels (and some brands have already tried it), and my guess is at some point, progressive states like California and Washington State will force the hand of CPG companies and retailers, much as they did around nutrition and calorie labeling for food service.

If and when that happens, GreenSwapp could be well-positioned to fulfill Varadharajan’s vision of making his technology the ‘Fitbit of sustainability.’

You can watch a demo of the GreenSwapp web tool below.

Demo of GreenSwapp carbon-tracking platform for food products.

Starbucks Pledges to Cut Carbon Emissions, Water Usage and Landfill Waste by Half by 2030

Starbucks CEO Kevin Johnson announced in a letter Tuesday that the company aspires to become resource positive within the next decade. 

To meet that aspiration, Johnson set three goals for Starbucks: reducing carbon emissions from its direct operations and supply chain by half; replenishing half of its water usage with a focus on “communities and basins with high water risk;” and a 50 percent reduction in its waste sent to landfills from its stores and manufacturing facilities. As part of that last goal, Johnson announced it is joining the Ellen MacArthur Foundation’s New Plastics Economy Global Commitment.

Starbucks has a lot of work ahead. The company, according to its own estimates, is responsible for 1 percent of all paper and plastic cups in the world, or 6 billion cups. It currently operates more than 28,000 stores across the world. 

As part of the pledge, Starbucks announced “five environmental strategies that will begin to move us toward a resource-positive future”: expanding plant-based options; shifting from single-use to reusable packaging; investing in “innovative and regenerative agricultural practices, reforestation, forest conservation and water replenishment” in its supply chain; investing in better ways to manage its waste; and developing innovations for more eco-friendly stores, operations, manufacturing and delivery.

“We agree with the consensus of scientific experts who note that without drastic action from everyone — governments, companies and all of us as individuals — adapting to the impact of climate change in the future will be far more difficult and costly,” Johnson wrote, “taking a toll on our supply chains, our business, and more importantly, the lives of everyone involved, including coffee farmers, our suppliers, Starbucks partners, customers and every community we serve.”

Johnson wrote that the company doesn’t have all the answers, and called on parties including entrepreneurs and its partners and customers to provide innovations and ideas.

Starbucks is among one of the biggest restaurant companies by revenue, and one of the largest to pledge to reduce its contributions to global warming causing emissions and pollution. McDonald’s and Taco Bell have also set ambitious sustainability goals. Drastic change is needed if we’re going to stem the worst effects of climate change, and business leaders’ commitment to the cause is both necessary and welcome, especially as world leaders continue to be dismissive of the threat life on the planet faces.

A Snapshot of the 6 Biggest Fast Food Companies’ Sustainability Pledges

Environmental issues are no longer an invisible threat. With temperatures warming, oceans are heating up and extreme weather events such as hurricanes and forest fires, as we’re currently seeing in Australia, are happening more frequently.

There’s only so much individuals can do to lessen our impact on the warming planet, including flying and driving less and cutting back on meat. It’s on governments and businesses, especially corporations, to stave off catastrophe.

As we start off a new decade, let’s take a look at the sustainability pledges of the top fast food companies by revenues. As emissions that result from meat and dairy production are on track to contribute 70 percent of the total allowable greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, the BBC reports, fast food chains’ decisions have a lot of impact on the planet, although most pledges have centered around packaging. As some of the largest brands on the planet, these moves will not only cut back on climate change causing emissions and pollution, but provide an example to other businesses.

1. McDonald’s

The world’s biggest restaurant company in 2018 was the first fast food company to commit to sustainability. McDonald’s pledged that by 2025, “100 percent of McDonald’s guest packaging will come from renewable, recycled, or certified sources,” and also “to recycle guest packaging in 100 percent of McDonald’s restaurants.” For this year, it also set a goal that “100 percent of fiber-based packaging will come from recycled or certified sources where no deforestation occurs.” The company has also invested in a wind farm and a solar farm that it said will produce “more than 2,500 McDonald’s restaurants-worth of electricity.” As far as plant-based options, the Golden Arches is expanding its Beyond Meat test in Canada.

2. Starbucks

According to the coffee giant, “an estimated 600 billion paper and plastic cups are distributed globally,” and Starbucks accounts for an estimated 1 percent of that total. It has set a goal to “double the recycled content, recyclability and compostability, and reusability of our cups and packaging by 2022.” It plans to phase out straws this year. (A small competitor of Starbucks, Blue Bottle, plans to eliminate disposable cups entirely.) Starbucks, which said it has invested in renewable energy, has also set a goal to design, build and operate 10,000 “Greener Stores” globally by 2025. Starbucks offers several plant-based milks, and is expanding its lineup of non-dairy drinks.

3. Subway

The sandwich company hasn’t made any specific pledges, and pins a lot of the responsibility of energy conservation on its franchise operators. Subway offers a meatless Beyond Meat meatball sub. The company says its paper products, including towels, tissues and napkins, are made from 100 percent recycled material. As for the rest of its materials, including cups, wraps, bowls and lids, Subway makes no further commitments to make them more sustainable.

4. Chick-fil-a

The popular chicken restaurant that closes on Sundays also hasn’t issued any major sustainability pledges. The company said last year it is “thoughtfully searching for sustainable design solutions that are recyclable, compostable or contain recycled content — starting with new bowls” made of recyclable PET plastic. Chick-fil-a has committed to reducing construction waste for its new locations. The chain offers no plant-based options.

5. Taco Bell

The Mexican-inspired food chain is the latest to issue a big sustainability pledge. It has committed to “making all consumer-facing packaging recyclable, compostable or reusable by 2025 worldwide,” as well as adding recycling and/or composting bins to all restaurants, “where infrastructure permits.” Last year, it committed to more sustainable beef. Taco Bell has long featured vegetarian and vegan options, and recently made them more prominent on its menu.

6. Burger King

The other burger chain also hasn’t set any firm sustainability commitments for the decade. Rather, it said it will “continuously review our policies on animal welfare, sourcing and environmental impact to ensure that we remain good corporate citizens in the communities we serve.” The company, responding to a Change.org petition, said it will stop giving out plastic toys, but only in the U.K. At least you can get the Impossible Whopper at every U.S. store.

Of course, the companies who did make pledges are not beholden to them. It’s up to investors and consumers to hold each company responsible to do their part to reducing their contributions to climate change.

If any company updates their pledges, we will revisit and update this article.

Startup Says its Spoons and Forks Compost in as Little as 10 Days

No offense to the humble spoon (after all, this site is named after it), but it’s not as necessary for modern American diets than its pointier sibling, the fork.

And although there’s been some innovation in terms of environmentally friendly disposable spoons in the form of Planeteers’ edible spoon, there are few options for plastic fork replacements that don’t destroy the Earth. Startup TwentyFifty aims to change that with its fork, which founder Zack Kong, a bioengineering graduate from the University of California San Diego, said is “the first compostable fork in the world that’s similar in function to plastic and wooden forks.”

The difference between TwentyFifty’s technically edible products — which currently include forks and spoons but will eventually encompass chopsticks, stirrers and straws — is its patent-pending manufacturing process that compresses wheat flour, soy flour, corn flour and water into strong utensils that can withstand higher temperatures. Essentially, TwentyFifty’s spoons won’t melt soaking in a bowl of hot soup for 30 minutes. Due to the nature of the ingredients of the utensils, the company says they will break down in a backyard compost pile in as little as 10 to 30 days, while competing compostable products need to be broken down in industrial plants.

“The other benefit of this product is not just the compostability, but it’s also an organic fertilizer,” said Albert Liu, a TwentyFifty board member and business advisor. “When these utensils compost, they add 2.7 cents worth of fertilizer to the soil. We use grains to make the utensils, then they go back into the earth to help grow more grains.”

The big hurdle for the company now is cost, with retail price per utensil around 50 cents each, wholesale at 25 cents and bulk at 15 cents. That’s hugely expensive compared to plastic, which could be as cheap as pennies per utensil. TwentyFifty anticipates prices to drop to 5 to 10 cents as it scales up and automates its production line, which will allow it to produce 10,000 to 20,000 units a day. 

TwentyFifty’s target market isn’t individual consumers, however, who could just use silverware. Rather, it’s aiming to partner with universities and municipalities. Liu said the company has a vendor agreement with UC San Diego, and has partnerships in place with Malibu, Santa Monica and San Francisco, which have all placed bans on single-use plastics. The utensils can also be found at a number of California cafes and yogurt shops.

Earlier this year, the New Food Economy found that so-called compostable bowls frequently used by Chipotle and Sweetgreen actually contained “forever chemical” PFAs, which as their name suggests, don’t break down. Meanwhile, plastic pollution continues to be a global threat. So if TwentyFifty’s utensils break down like the company claims, and more environmentally friendly alternatives become available, progress can be made toward preventing future waste.

Fancy Countertop Water Machines Are Not the Solution to the Bottled Water Crisis

Single-use plastics are a threat to the world, and a large contributor of that waste is bottled water. The segment, led by food conglomerates including Coca-Cola, PepsiCo and Nestle, is a huge business, pulling in $16 billion in 2016 in the U.S.

It makes sense then that startups and other companies are now introducing alternatives to bottled water to prevent more plastics from entering landfills and oceans. These alternatives take the form of countertop water filters, and there’s no shortage of them. Coming soon to the market are Lang’s All-in-One Drinks System, the Rocean One and Mitte.

All offer similar features: they filter water, of course, but also carbonate or mineralize it. Lang and Rocean also offer flavoring packs. All the machines are smart, reminding users when to replace the filters, carbon and mineral cartridges and flavoring packs. They also come at a high price, with Lang costing about $555, Mitte coming in at $529 and Rocean $349. Amazingly, there are waitlists for all three devices (the later two were successfully crowdfunded).

While these companies’ goals are laudable — Rocean’s plan is “to remove 1 billion single-use bottles from circulation within five years” — it’s built on the faulty premise that Americans even need to buy bottled water in the first place. Essentially, buying an expensive machine to filter water so you don’t buy bottled water cures a problem that is entirely avoidable in the first place.

For most people in the U.S., tap water is generally safe to drink. If you want to be extra cautious, you can buy a relatively inexpensive filter such as ones made by Brita or Pur. There is also always the option of boiling water to kill potential microorganisms.

But perhaps the main reason to stop buying bottled water is that it’s not even safer to drink than most tap water (and it has more microplastics). This is due to the fact that in the U.S. and Europe, more rigorous standards are applied to tap water than bottled, according to a study commissioned by The World Wildlife Fund. So really, people are paying corporations to put water that’s of equal or lesser quality to tap water in a plastic bottle that will live on for hundreds of years.

So spare yourself from opening your wallet for what Fast Company has dubbed “the Juicero of water,” and pour yourself a nice glass or reusable bottle of tap water. Not only will you prevent another plastic bottle from entering a landfill or the ocean, you’ll save money too.

Inventor Says He Created a Process to Strengthen Banana Leaves for Use as a Plastic Alternative

From single-serve utensils to bags, the world is drowning in plastic, and recycling won’t save us. That’s why environmentally friendly alternatives are desperately needed to prevent more damage to the planet.

One inventive solution, courtesy of 20-year-old Indian inventor Tenith Adithyaa, is what he calls banana leaf technology, a process that he says costs 1 cent each use and strengthens the cell walls and organs of anything made of plants (banana leaves are mostly used because of their availability around the world, he said), stopping their aging for about three years.

Once strengthened, these organic materials can be transformed into cups, plates, cones, envelopes and boxes, which after use can be broken down naturally in 28 days, as opposed to centuries with plastics. Leaves preserved with this technology can resist extreme temperatures and hold more weight, according to Adithyaa.

“Since banana leaf technology is applicable to numerous materials and applications, the usage of these products are countless,” Adithyaa wrote to The Spoon in an email. “We envision a cost-effective biodegradable choice must be available to all human beings regardless of their geographical and economical boundaries.”

Adithyaa didn’t share any details of how the technology works, other than that it’s cellular enhancement and the process doesn’t require the use of chemicals. We currently don’t know whether the technology will work on a large scale.

(Courtesy Tenith Adithyaa)

Adithyaa said he plans to license the technology to companies around the world and currently is in the process of working with a few global enterprises. Partnering with companies allows manufacturing to happen at a local level. For any countries where banana leaves aren’t available, he said other leaves can be used.

It’s unknown how items made of banana leaves will hold up, but Adithyaa isn’t the only working on more natural alternatives to plastics. For example, there’s TIPA, which says its materials break down in 180 days, Zume, the pizza truck company that recently purchased a compostable packaging maker, and Planeteer, creators of an edible spoon (which won the top prize at our Smart Kitchen Summit Future Food competition this week!).

Hopefully, these alternatives will soon replace our dangerous use of plastics and buy the world some time to stave off further ecological disaster.

Study: Carbon Footprint Labeling Impacts Shopper Behavior

The COP24 United Nations Climate Change Conference wrapped up last week, and while the outcome of the conference was generally positive, the world is still facing an increasingly dire future for our planet.

One change people can make to help save the world is altering what they eat. Transitioning away from meat to a more plant-based diet can help reduce the global greenhouse emissions that come from food production. And a new study from the University of Technology Sydney and Duke University shows that simply labeling food with its carbon footprint may be a way to get people to eat less meat.

It turns out, many people don’t understand the carbon consequences of their food choices, and the study found that they greatly underestimate the carbon footprint of the foods they eat.

“With an appliance such as a heater you can feel the energy used and see an electricity bill at the end of the month, so the impact is quite salient, whereas the impact of food production is largely invisible,” said the study’s lead author Dr. Adrian Camilleri in a statement.

So the study created a carbon footprint labeling system for food similar to the five star energy ratings given to appliances. From the press release announcing the study’s findings:

They presented 120 participants with a choice of soups to buy. When the soups had a carbon footprint label, participants bought fewer beef soups and more vegetable soups than when there was no label provided.

The research suggests that the introduction of carbon footprint labels on food items could be a simple intervention to increase understanding of energy use and greenhouse gas emissions from food production, and thus reduce environmental impacts.

While not comprehensive, this study fits in with previous market research that shows grocery shoppers today want more information about the products they buy. Millennials in particular care about more social issues like animal welfare, fair trade, and, it would stand to reason, environmental impact.

If carbon footprint labeling were to catch on, this would presumably be a boon to alternative or “fake” meat companies like Beyond Meat, Impossible Foods and Seattle Food Tech, which are creating plant-based simulacra of our favorite meats. But more importantly, it looks like a small thing like a food label could have a big impact on our planet.

D’oh No! Climate Change to Make Beer More Expensive

In news that is bound to become a storyline on The Simpsons at some point, a new study published in Nature today says climate change is likely going to make beer more expensive.

From that study’s abstract (emphasis ours):

We couple a process-based crop model (decision support system for agrotechnology transfer) and a global economic model (Global Trade Analysis Project model) to evaluate the effects of concurrent drought and heat extremes projected under a range of future climate scenarios. We find that these extreme events may cause substantial decreases in barley yields worldwide. Average yield losses range from 3% to 17% depending on the severity of the conditions. Decreases in the global supply of barley lead to proportionally larger decreases in barley used to make beer and ultimately result in dramatic regional decreases in beer consumption (for example, −32% in Argentina) and increases in beer prices (for example, +193% in Ireland). Although not the most concerning impact of future climate change, climate-related weather extremes may threaten the availability and economic accessibility of beer.

Yikes! Ireland’s beer prices means we may have to re-think Dublin as future home for the Smart Kitchen Summit: Europe.

Sure, that’s a joke, and this is obviously serious stuff. This study comes just a week after a searing (pardon the pun) report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) saying basically we have a decade as a planet to get climate change under control.

There is a tendency to ignore the dire climate change warnings as the problem seems too big, our individual contribution too small, and the consequences too abstract. That’s in part why this report was written — to bring the climate change debate down to a level most people will understand: beer.

Steve Davis of the University of California, Irvine, and one of the co-authors of the Nature study, told the AP that one of the reasons they chose beer as their subject was to “drive home the not-that-palatable message that climate change is messing with all sorts of aspects of our daily lives.”

If beer is not your bag, there are plenty of other treats in trouble. Climate change is threatening coffee and chocolate as well.

But every crisis is an opportunity, or as Homer Simpson called it — a “crisitunity”, and we regularly report on smart startups innovating in areas like combating food waste and improving supply chains. Hopefully more will hear this Clarion and act to save not just beer but, well, the planet.