Meal Kits Have a Smaller Carbon Footprint Than Grocery Shopping, Study Says(npr.org)
npr.org
Meal Kits Have a Smaller Carbon Footprint Than Grocery Shopping, Study Says
https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2019/04/22/716010599/meal-kits-have-smaller-carbon-footprint-than-grocery-shopping-study-says
40 comments
It stands to reason that bulk preparation of these meals would lead to dramatic reduce in waste compared to individuals. It would be an obvious metric to monitor.
You know what this feels like? Remember that guy who was some economics professor in NYC that laid the claim that public libraries are terrible for the economy or some other nonsense and that it's best to just let Amazon sell people books instead. Plus, he roughly said something along the lines of "It'll be good for their stock price too".
Remember that jackass? Feels like he's at it again.
And the math and logic used in this drives me insane. It's like the same logic "Oh, it's cheaper to buy half an ounce of taco seasoning instead of a pound. The half ounce pack is only a dollar. A pound is 5 dollars." Makes me want to rip my hair out and scream.
Remember that jackass? Feels like he's at it again.
And the math and logic used in this drives me insane. It's like the same logic "Oh, it's cheaper to buy half an ounce of taco seasoning instead of a pound. The half ounce pack is only a dollar. A pound is 5 dollars." Makes me want to rip my hair out and scream.
The company that produces the meal kits can buy all the ingredients in bulk.
They can portion all the ingredients perfectly so that there's no waste.
They don't need to staff, light, heat, cool, and stock any stores.
And you don't need to go to the store and back, which means less emissions.
The argument is perfectly sensible, when we're comparing to normal cooking in American households. Maybe compared to a Mexican cookout for your whole extended family and neighborhood, it isn't as good, but that's not the most relevant comparison in a typical US context.
They can portion all the ingredients perfectly so that there's no waste.
They don't need to staff, light, heat, cool, and stock any stores.
And you don't need to go to the store and back, which means less emissions.
The argument is perfectly sensible, when we're comparing to normal cooking in American households. Maybe compared to a Mexican cookout for your whole extended family and neighborhood, it isn't as good, but that's not the most relevant comparison in a typical US context.
They can buy in bulk... unlike grocery stores?
Portioning food for you at a premium because you can’t adult?
Goto the store and back? Like, pick up a head of garlic, go home, then pick up carrots, go home, etc? Most folks in America do a one day shop to pick up groceries for the week.
Because individually wrapped foods is so less wasteful than buying even minimal bulk.
What I love about this, it’s people who never grew up poor who try to tell people how to live cheaper and frugal. It’s amazingly stupid. I grew up white trash poor. You know how you keep costs down? Buy in bulk and cut out the middle men as much as possible. Meal kit companies are another middle man with plenty of overhead both financially and environmentally.
These kits typically cost $10 and I still have to cook? Most of these are of the $3 to $4 range if you buy it all yourself sensibly at the store.
Portioning food for you at a premium because you can’t adult?
Goto the store and back? Like, pick up a head of garlic, go home, then pick up carrots, go home, etc? Most folks in America do a one day shop to pick up groceries for the week.
Because individually wrapped foods is so less wasteful than buying even minimal bulk.
What I love about this, it’s people who never grew up poor who try to tell people how to live cheaper and frugal. It’s amazingly stupid. I grew up white trash poor. You know how you keep costs down? Buy in bulk and cut out the middle men as much as possible. Meal kit companies are another middle man with plenty of overhead both financially and environmentally.
These kits typically cost $10 and I still have to cook? Most of these are of the $3 to $4 range if you buy it all yourself sensibly at the store.
"You know how you keep costs down? Buy in bulk and cut out the middle men as much as possible."
I have been noticing frequently that unit prices for larger packages of things are often as high or higher than smaller ones. I suspect that due to the increasing quality of data analytics, stores have realized that they can systematically take advantage of the majority of people who don't scrutinize everything and make assumptions.
It's interesting that you don't mention looking for things on sale. That is something I have rarely done in the past, but I'm starting to feel like maybe it's necessary to avoid being screwed.
Shopping for a week or more is only logical if you can't stop at a store on your way home from work, and you live a long way from it. I live less than a mile from work, and slightly over a mile from the nearest supermarket.
I have been noticing frequently that unit prices for larger packages of things are often as high or higher than smaller ones. I suspect that due to the increasing quality of data analytics, stores have realized that they can systematically take advantage of the majority of people who don't scrutinize everything and make assumptions.
It's interesting that you don't mention looking for things on sale. That is something I have rarely done in the past, but I'm starting to feel like maybe it's necessary to avoid being screwed.
Shopping for a week or more is only logical if you can't stop at a store on your way home from work, and you live a long way from it. I live less than a mile from work, and slightly over a mile from the nearest supermarket.
I got more on a soap box there because I lost my cool a bit. But yea, sales and clearances were our vital methods of staying within budget. Hell, there was one week I survived on a 96 cent clearance bag of assorted bread from Walmart.
But one of the other things that’s getting lost is the human element. It seems like if it’s not on the internet, it doesn’t exist or is unattainable. I developed relationships with farmers and some businesses to get the undesirable pickings or overflow at a lower price. Nothing wrong with them or even spoiled. Think of, ever seen a really ugly ass strawberry? Most packagers don’t accept them because of stupid public perception. Or they just sneak one or two in. You can get those really damn cheap from a grower. Or slightly over ripe for even cheaper or free. Then you learn how to make your own preserves out of them. Some farmers markets have end of weekend sell offs too. Super cheap on all the leftovers that haven’t sold. I’m pretty sure you can do the same with a supermarket if you get to know the right people. But I never tried a big box market.
But also, bagel shops and Panera, make friends with the night crew. You can get some of the days unsold baked goods for free or for 5 bucks. But people just refuse to know others and that’s being considered “okay”.
It’s not. I’m introverted too. It’s not okay to hide from society and run away from relationships.
I’m in tech now. Tech is great and all... but it’s so damn silly to imagine that an internet company can save poor people somehow with their service. Same with the logic of bitcoin saving those without access to “fiat currency”. If ya don’t have access to a dollar, ya don’t really have access to the internet, let alone a computer.
I live 1.4 miles from the grocery store I visit. It’s still smart to only shop once a week. It’s the death by a million papercuts in finance. If you go too often, your likelihood of buying things you don’t truly need goes up. That’s bad for your budget. Plus think, your mob/demob time at a grocery store is always about 5 min. Finding a parking spot, walk into the store, ring up, cash out, walk to the car, load groceries, leave parking lot. That doesn’t include actual shopping or travel to the store. It’s only 20min once a week for me to get groceries, roughly. You can spend way more than that, in time per week, if you go to the store to pick up as you need. Just in time inventory works fine for stores. But not really for people. It’s scary where your time sinks are when you track your time.
But one of the other things that’s getting lost is the human element. It seems like if it’s not on the internet, it doesn’t exist or is unattainable. I developed relationships with farmers and some businesses to get the undesirable pickings or overflow at a lower price. Nothing wrong with them or even spoiled. Think of, ever seen a really ugly ass strawberry? Most packagers don’t accept them because of stupid public perception. Or they just sneak one or two in. You can get those really damn cheap from a grower. Or slightly over ripe for even cheaper or free. Then you learn how to make your own preserves out of them. Some farmers markets have end of weekend sell offs too. Super cheap on all the leftovers that haven’t sold. I’m pretty sure you can do the same with a supermarket if you get to know the right people. But I never tried a big box market.
But also, bagel shops and Panera, make friends with the night crew. You can get some of the days unsold baked goods for free or for 5 bucks. But people just refuse to know others and that’s being considered “okay”.
It’s not. I’m introverted too. It’s not okay to hide from society and run away from relationships.
I’m in tech now. Tech is great and all... but it’s so damn silly to imagine that an internet company can save poor people somehow with their service. Same with the logic of bitcoin saving those without access to “fiat currency”. If ya don’t have access to a dollar, ya don’t really have access to the internet, let alone a computer.
I live 1.4 miles from the grocery store I visit. It’s still smart to only shop once a week. It’s the death by a million papercuts in finance. If you go too often, your likelihood of buying things you don’t truly need goes up. That’s bad for your budget. Plus think, your mob/demob time at a grocery store is always about 5 min. Finding a parking spot, walk into the store, ring up, cash out, walk to the car, load groceries, leave parking lot. That doesn’t include actual shopping or travel to the store. It’s only 20min once a week for me to get groceries, roughly. You can spend way more than that, in time per week, if you go to the store to pick up as you need. Just in time inventory works fine for stores. But not really for people. It’s scary where your time sinks are when you track your time.
My attitude has been, if I'm concerned about my cash flow/finances, and I can't find a way to earn more, then I need to look at what I'm spending on housing and transportation which outweigh everything else. When something worries me, I try to ask myself, is this what is really worrying me, or am I substituting something that seems more easily controlled for the real problem?
It's a cliche that if you could eliminate your daily Starbucks you would save enough to become a millionaire some day. But if I continue to get retail coffee whenever I want, I won't get it anywhere near every day. So the savings aren't that great. Same for real butter, or visually attractive produce, or imported organic pasta. Something that is a small fraction of my income and which I do a small fraction of the time is just not the place to look for savings. My rule of thumb is that while it is true that small things can add up, small things multiplied by small things don't add up significantly.
It's a cliche that if you could eliminate your daily Starbucks you would save enough to become a millionaire some day. But if I continue to get retail coffee whenever I want, I won't get it anywhere near every day. So the savings aren't that great. Same for real butter, or visually attractive produce, or imported organic pasta. Something that is a small fraction of my income and which I do a small fraction of the time is just not the place to look for savings. My rule of thumb is that while it is true that small things can add up, small things multiplied by small things don't add up significantly.
Blue Apron was name dropped quite a lot in that article... Who sponsored this study?
One of my biggest problems with meal kits was the huge amount of plastic waste with each one. Blue Apron was an example of this with little bottles of ketchup.
Look, I have ketchup already in my house. The meal kits need a way for you to check off the general staples like that. OK send me fermented garlic, but I have ketchup and vinegar don't waste the plastic sending me those.
It makes me wonder if there is just a lot better way of doing cookbooks. I know that Isa Chandra already has sections of her books for "a well-stocked pantry" that just gets you stocked up on the items that will be used and reused throughout her books (e.g., liquid smoke or tamari). Expanding off that idea and refactoring meal kits I think could really work in everyone's favor. Perhaps at a point in the subscription, you could just get larger items sent to you once that the kit provider knows will be used over and over in subsequent recipes since they're the planner.
Look, I have ketchup already in my house. The meal kits need a way for you to check off the general staples like that. OK send me fermented garlic, but I have ketchup and vinegar don't waste the plastic sending me those.
It makes me wonder if there is just a lot better way of doing cookbooks. I know that Isa Chandra already has sections of her books for "a well-stocked pantry" that just gets you stocked up on the items that will be used and reused throughout her books (e.g., liquid smoke or tamari). Expanding off that idea and refactoring meal kits I think could really work in everyone's favor. Perhaps at a point in the subscription, you could just get larger items sent to you once that the kit provider knows will be used over and over in subsequent recipes since they're the planner.
I couldn’t find anywhere including the article. NPR has a disclaimer though that one of their sponsors is Blue Apron.
The research reads so weak, though. For instance, they don’t count CO2 emission caused by transportation! They just bought the same ingredients at a grocery store, cooked the same meal themselves and compared the numbers! They also assume that you eat all of the meal kit.
So many assumptions, hard to replicate methods, arbitrary exclusions.
Even if this was not sponsored, pretty bad “research” anyways.
The research reads so weak, though. For instance, they don’t count CO2 emission caused by transportation! They just bought the same ingredients at a grocery store, cooked the same meal themselves and compared the numbers! They also assume that you eat all of the meal kit.
So many assumptions, hard to replicate methods, arbitrary exclusions.
Even if this was not sponsored, pretty bad “research” anyways.
From the article:
"Of course, shipping meal kits to millions of households causes emissions. But these kits are delivered alongside other mail on normal routes, and the researchers found that this last stage of distribution accounted for 11% of grocery store meal emissions but only 4% for meal kits."
"Of course, shipping meal kits to millions of households causes emissions. But these kits are delivered alongside other mail on normal routes, and the researchers found that this last stage of distribution accounted for 11% of grocery store meal emissions but only 4% for meal kits."
By that logic, only that one letter at the very end of the delivery route is responsible for any of the co2 emissions from package delivery. Everything else is just along for the ride, since they were going by anyway.
Bingo! This is one of my pet peeves!
If you want to accurately measure the cost of sending a package (or passenger, or data packet), for any reasonable purpose, you can't use the "just one more" test. You have to say, "what if I increased the load by a million units? Okay, the unit cost should be regarded as a millionth of that."
Here's a great application of the concept when Netflix tried to use the "just one more" model: [1]
>The green marketing gurus at Netflix go even further, arguing that the mail is going to be delivered to your house anyway, so the environmental cost of delivering one of their DVDs is effectively zero. ... Here, the Green Lantern feels Netflix may be overplaying its hand just a little: Eventually, the addition of new mail into the system adds up, requiring more trucks, greater strain on the mail-sorting system, and so on. Since we can’t identify the impact of one extra piece of mail, we’re better off averaging the cost of delivering the mail over each item.
[1] https://slate.com/technology/2008/08/is-your-netflix-queue-d...
It was discussed on HN too: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=414173
If you want to accurately measure the cost of sending a package (or passenger, or data packet), for any reasonable purpose, you can't use the "just one more" test. You have to say, "what if I increased the load by a million units? Okay, the unit cost should be regarded as a millionth of that."
Here's a great application of the concept when Netflix tried to use the "just one more" model: [1]
>The green marketing gurus at Netflix go even further, arguing that the mail is going to be delivered to your house anyway, so the environmental cost of delivering one of their DVDs is effectively zero. ... Here, the Green Lantern feels Netflix may be overplaying its hand just a little: Eventually, the addition of new mail into the system adds up, requiring more trucks, greater strain on the mail-sorting system, and so on. Since we can’t identify the impact of one extra piece of mail, we’re better off averaging the cost of delivering the mail over each item.
[1] https://slate.com/technology/2008/08/is-your-netflix-queue-d...
It was discussed on HN too: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=414173
Isn't there just some average value floating around out there to estimate the cost of an ounce-mile of mail?
At any rate, your food gets shipped from same place and ends up with you. Isn't the co2 going to be basically the same if that's to a grocery store first or to a big cooking joint? Assuming the locations are roughly similar.
At any rate, your food gets shipped from same place and ends up with you. Isn't the co2 going to be basically the same if that's to a grocery store first or to a big cooking joint? Assuming the locations are roughly similar.
I think you are being uncharitable - is there any reason to think they are using the specious logic you are imputing? The fact that the truck already has a route with a lot of packages means the emissions are lower even when you count the meal kits proportionally. And they didn't count the emissions as zero, right?
I've learned to never be charitable when it comes to corporate/marketing speak.
Yeah, their meal kits generate a ridiculous amount of waste.
The assumption that meal kits cause less food waste is dubious. This is exactly why we stopped getting Blue Apron - we found that we only ate 1 out of 3 kits we got, and our fridge would pile up with unused raw ingredients we would hope to be able to use before they spoiled. In the end we decided the combination of trash and food waste was too much and went back to groceries full time.
> But store meals required purchasing food in larger quantities than necessary (think a 12-pack of hamburger buns for a two-person meal).
This is the key, and one of the reasons I love Blue Apron. The meals come in such exactly portioned amounts that the only thing left when I'm done eating is the packaging. There is zero food waste, ever. (Incidentally, this makes an effective weight-loss diet if your problem is overeating like me.)
That being said, I wonder if Blue Apron would still come out ahead of home cooking if you did not attempt to make the same meals but instead more typical home cooked meals. Blue Apron recipes on average are more varied and have more ingredients than what a person would normally cook, so I wonder if the extra food waste is more a consequence of trying to reproduce them.
This is the key, and one of the reasons I love Blue Apron. The meals come in such exactly portioned amounts that the only thing left when I'm done eating is the packaging. There is zero food waste, ever. (Incidentally, this makes an effective weight-loss diet if your problem is overeating like me.)
That being said, I wonder if Blue Apron would still come out ahead of home cooking if you did not attempt to make the same meals but instead more typical home cooked meals. Blue Apron recipes on average are more varied and have more ingredients than what a person would normally cook, so I wonder if the extra food waste is more a consequence of trying to reproduce them.
Freezers are a thing.
There's an energy cost to keep food frozen for weeks or months at a time. It's common for houses to have multiple fridges and freezes, you wouldn't need to do this if food was delivered when you wanted to eat.
Having more stuff in your freezer actually costs less. Due to the higher thermal mass that takes longer to warm up when the freezer is off. So if more food delivery means less stuff in the freezer, it's going to take more energy.
And let's be honest, no one is going to ditch their freezer entirely for something like blue apron.
And let's be honest, no one is going to ditch their freezer entirely for something like blue apron.
My brother just moved into an apartment and wants to get a chest freezer so he can store more frozen food. But there's really nowhere to put it, so he has to go out grocery shopping more often then not.
People who already have freezers won't ditch them, why get rid of something that works. This will be a generational change - younger generations will never get secondary freezers because they'll be big consumers of meal kits.
People who already have freezers won't ditch them, why get rid of something that works. This will be a generational change - younger generations will never get secondary freezers because they'll be big consumers of meal kits.
One good snowstorm or something else that interrupts delivery... No food for your family. Seems like it makes society more brittle. Kind of like internet everything.
Do you think many users of that service sell their fridges?
[deleted]
Ultimately changing consumer behavior and the way we shop is the way to reduce the carbon footprint and waste, not delivery food services. Even being aware that everything has an environmental cost can make a difference in how one purchases food.
Eat less meat. Make delis, bakeries, butchers, etc... more available in the grocery store so instead of buying six chicken breasts you can buy two. Same for hamburger buns, go to the bakery and buy individual buns. Make grocery stores donate their food or compost it rather than throw it out. Save and more importantly eat leftovers! While obviously not for everyone, shop for a few days not a week or two. More grocery stores need to provide a local Blue Apron alternative so I can go in and pick up a few boxes with whatever else I need.
Eat less meat. Make delis, bakeries, butchers, etc... more available in the grocery store so instead of buying six chicken breasts you can buy two. Same for hamburger buns, go to the bakery and buy individual buns. Make grocery stores donate their food or compost it rather than throw it out. Save and more importantly eat leftovers! While obviously not for everyone, shop for a few days not a week or two. More grocery stores need to provide a local Blue Apron alternative so I can go in and pick up a few boxes with whatever else I need.
There's a whole class of article like this one that rub me the wrong way for reasons I can't quite explain.
It's basically taking a theoretical "average person" who just happens to be very wasteful and extrapolating in the headline, heavily implying something which isn't actually the case.
I don't waste food unless you include things like chopping the end off an onion because it could theoretically have been used in a soup. Actual waste, the sort of 'throwing away a burger' the article describes, just doesn't happen to me.
Beyond that, logically a person who cares about their carbon footprint does not waste (significant amounts of) food.
X is bigger than Y if you stretch X.
It's basically taking a theoretical "average person" who just happens to be very wasteful and extrapolating in the headline, heavily implying something which isn't actually the case.
I don't waste food unless you include things like chopping the end off an onion because it could theoretically have been used in a soup. Actual waste, the sort of 'throwing away a burger' the article describes, just doesn't happen to me.
Beyond that, logically a person who cares about their carbon footprint does not waste (significant amounts of) food.
X is bigger than Y if you stretch X.
I used to be good at not wasting food until I had kids. A toddler will ask for a burger, confirm they want a burger, and then not eat any of it. Or they'll just eat the cheese. You can save it in a tupperware in the fridge and they might take a bite from it in the next few days but eventually you will have to throw it out. If you try to eat the burger the child will cry.
Still no good if you’re trading carbon emissions for a lot more plastic in the environment. You cannot offset / undo plastics.
Meal kits waste an incredible amount of plastic. Using it felt immoral.
I think people are being way too dismissive of this. There is a ton of waste that goes on getting you your groceries. Walmart is notorious for fucking small farmers by rejecting huge quantities of pre agreed on produce. Once in the store some % gets tossed out before it even gets to the inside shelves. Then you have the amount the consumer wastes.
I'm not necessarily saying this is a good take because that seems like a fuck ton of plastic they use, but I could see it being overall relatively a more efficient way.
I'm not necessarily saying this is a good take because that seems like a fuck ton of plastic they use, but I could see it being overall relatively a more efficient way.
I'd assume that the store throwing out some of the waste before hitting shelves would likely be done by the meal prep companies too. But agree on the consumer waste
What if you buy meal kit in a supermarket (common here in NZ)?
I feel it's the delivery that's worst part of these. Grabbing one while you shop or on a way back from work seems genius.
Ultimately these companies don't really have a moat. Most supermarkets deliver to your home or carry their own set of kits...
I feel it's the delivery that's worst part of these. Grabbing one while you shop or on a way back from work seems genius.
Ultimately these companies don't really have a moat. Most supermarkets deliver to your home or carry their own set of kits...
It used to be that much of what was bought at a grocery would come in basic paper or plastic wrapping. Now much of my work is with residential maintenance and these meal kits are a huge problem at every level.
They are huge boxes that get delivered by big trucks, but there is not enough delivery parking or storage.
Then they generate a bunch of waste which is supposed to be mostly recyclable but ends up going out as one big mess of garbage with the boxes not broken down and all of the items unsorted and mixed together with wet garbage.
The situation reminds me of the flushable wipes crisis that snuck up on everyone despite plenty of early warnings.
They are huge boxes that get delivered by big trucks, but there is not enough delivery parking or storage.
Then they generate a bunch of waste which is supposed to be mostly recyclable but ends up going out as one big mess of garbage with the boxes not broken down and all of the items unsorted and mixed together with wet garbage.
The situation reminds me of the flushable wipes crisis that snuck up on everyone despite plenty of early warnings.
[deleted]
Who funded the study?
Meal kits don't fully replace all your food for a week, so it is unlikely to eliminate a whole trip to the store so those emission savings that they are counting towards the meal kits are suspect. And then the waste statistics will vary heavily on the person and household characteristics. I've known people who procrastinate on making the meal kits and throw the whole thing out or let their roommates pick over whatever hasn't rotten. In addition, since some things with Blue Apron come pre-cut or picked, I wonder how the researchers measured waste at Blue Apron's kit production facilities, where some parts of the vegetables/meat aren't used in any recipe or waste from over-ordered produce.
Edit: More details are here https://news.umich.edu/those-home-delivered-meal-kits-are-gr...