Unitedkingdom: Regional Subs Advice Subs

28/06/2021 Traffic-light system of ‘eco-scores’ to be piloted on British food labels : unitedkingdom
  Search     Free 
unitedkingdom
Posts Regional Subs Advice Subs
Posted by u/altmorty 1 day ago
Traffic-light system of ‘eco-scores’ to be piloted on

British food labels
theguardian.com/busine... 

 62 Comments  Award  Share  94% Upvoted
u/adobe · PROMOTED
86% of creative teams scramble to stay relevant to customers. See the trends shaping the
workplace.
adobe.com/creativecloud/busine... Learn More
Comment as gsr_psy
What are your thoughts?
           Markdown Mode
SORT BY BEST
View discussions in 7 other communities
https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/o92eii/trafficlight_system_of_ecoscores_to_be_piloted_on/ 1/12
Plastic-Major4102 · 1d
I like this idea but a little cynical on how well it can be implemented.
How well can you rate environmental impact? Nestle for example is one of the biggest
plastic polluters in the world and they are backing this scheme.Will the scores reflect that?
 55
  Reply Share 
siredmundsnaillary · 23h · edited 23h
I like the idea as well but the devil is in the details.
How are they going to actually calculate their rating? How do you balance carbon
footprint with water usage, or impact on local ecosystems, or waste generated etc...?
I hope they can find a metric that people will understand and generally support.
Otherwise the scheme will rapidly be undermined by critics.
EDIT: I was hired as a consultant by a UK supermarket, more than ten years ago, to help
them look at this very issue. Their conclusion at the time was that they couldn't put
together a credible system. They focussed mostly on carbon footprint and found there
were simply too many counter-intuitive results that just confused customers.
 22
Jamaicaman90 · 10h
Swansea
I was hired as a consultant by a UK supermarket, more than ten years ago, to help
them look at this very issue. Their conclusion at the time was that they couldn't put
together a credible system. They focussed mostly on carbon footprint and found
there were simply too many counter-intuitive results that just confused customers.
Is this 'there is no ethical consumption under capitalism' in action though? Were your
findings primarily that things were counter-intuitive, or was it that you were left
realising that no matter what you did, a typical shop was unavoidably environmentally
damaging?
4  Reply Share 

dipdipderp · 9h
Steel City
No what OP is outlining is a big problem in life cycle assessment: you have a bunch
of mid point and end point indicators that all show different aspects of
environmental damage. Deciding which ones are 'more important' is inherently
subjective and scaling acceptable growths (in negative impacts) in some to offset
gains in others is even more difficult.
 4   Reply Share 
Jamaicaman90 · 9h
Swansea
I understand that (as well as understanding that the whole thing is complicated
to the point where I don't have the experience and knowledge in the area to
argue against anything here). What I'm getting at is asking if part of that
difficulty
 Search can 
is due to the fact that very few things come   Free
out of any score 
balance in a positive manner due to how our food chain is set up. It strikes me
that perhaps it wouldn't have been abandoned if you could still get a sense of
'good' and 'not good' even if the specifics were debatable.
 -1
dipdipderp · 8h
Steel City
The problem with a diametric good and not good is it offers no scale.
If product A is 'good' for reducing CO2 emissions and 'not good' for human
toxicity; whilst product B was the reverse how do I make a choice on which
product to sell or buy?
So naturally, we need to add a scale. But it isn't just in balance of 2

categories - but a multitude, we typically look at 10 or 11. Which means we
need two scales: importance of indicator and importance of relative score.
You can (and many have in preceding & proceeding years since OPs story)
add your own importance to each but it does come with significant risks - I
can see why a supermarket may decide that it isn't worth it. This is without
considering the reality of how expensive it is to conduct reliable studies like
this to help you make these decisions for each product.
It's why the carbon footprint is so popular - it's one dimensional and doesn't
require any to think too much about balancing impacts beyond minimising
fossil carbon use which is generally seen as fine considering the global
situation.
There is definitely a lot of assessment that goes on in things like

procurement teams etc. but it generally doesn't translate well to a fixed
value label system.
Jamaicaman90 · 8h
Swansea
Very interesting, thanks.
I suppose if the 'there is no ethical consumption under capitalism' quote

I brought up has any weight then, it's because it's impractical to ever
have the opportunity to make informed decisions on the ethics of
environmental impact. Of course, that's before the other ethical issues
that may be involved (labour, economic exploitation etc.).
ersioo · 12h
Bought 4 carbons worth of offset credits ? A++
Member of the "totaly not made up super carbon awareness trust" ? A++
Wanallo221 · 1d
Yeah I doubt that because otherwise everything Nestle, Coca Cola, Walmart and a few
others use should be worst rated regardless of the product itself.
I like the concept though. It’s going to be hard to implement in a meaningful way though.
twistedLucidity · 22h
Scotland
Yup. All big brands will be green and little will change but barriers to entry will be raised
for any potential disruptors, and that's all the .o ry cares about.
verygenericname2 · 18h
Greater Manchester
Aye. Nestle backing it set alarm bells ringing in my head.
WithTheFaries · 10h
usually companies will use an LCA assessment, which determines the environmental
impact of a product from the extracting of materials to end of life, using the ISO 4000
series of environmental assessment guidelines.

dipdipderp · 9h
Steel City
If you are aware of the relevant ISOs I'd assume you are equally aware of how bad
companies are at sticking to them (especially regarding data confidentiality) and how
difficult it is deal with some aspects like multi-functionality & allocation even with
good intentions.
As someone in this area I am hopeful that this is a step in the right direction, but
worried that labels will become a greenwashing mess.
R_Jay101 · 23h
Derbyshire
Anything but actually regulating companies or implementing a Carbon tax.
All this does is shift the blame from companies to the consumer.
 28   Reply 
 28   Reply 
Share
SMURGwastaken · 22h
Somerset
Tbf this is the step before a carbon tax. We saw it with sugar before the sugar tax.
moussa_siGOATo · 23h
Companies' pollution is a direct result of what consumers buy though. If consumers buy
1 million cheap beef burger per week and the meat company produces 10,000kg of
carbon (random figure) then you can't just blame them.

R_Jay101 · 23h
Derbyshire
Most consumers dont research the environmental impact of everything they buy.
They buy whats cheap and convenient. Thats just human nature. So the government
needs to make polluting expensive and inconvenient.
I'd fully agree with you saying the onus is absolutely on governments.
The trouble is now let's say I produce beef burgers but I'm conscious about the
environmental impact so I start offsetting some of what I do but this costs me
money and so my burgers increase in price. All that would happen is that
consumers would swap to a cheaper competitor. Most companies will do the bare
minimum for the environment or they'll probably die out.
That said consumers could definitely do more, you don't need to do really any
research to know that any cow product is very bad for instance.
tomoldbury · 22h
[...] Most companies will do the bare minimum for the environment or they'll
probably die out.
This is why we need a carbon tax though. It pits capitalism against itself, it
makes it pay for the externalities it creates. Companies will want to lower costs,
and the way they do it is by cleaning up their act.
I'm fully with you there.
Grayson81 · 22h
London
Most consumers dont research the environmental impact of everything they

buy.
We won’t have to do much research if it’s clearly labelled. That’s the point of this
initiative.
(Though I agree a proper carbon tax would be a much better move)
Smart_Emphasis · 9h

worotan · 10h
Greater Manchester
True.
The trouble with saying it’s no responsibility of consumers, though, is that

consumers vote for the politicians, and the politicians know that vastly more of
those voters are the ones they’d upset with carbon pricing.
The whole thing’s a round of corporate buck passing, between companies,

consumers and politicians, all blaming the others for their own lack of a prompt to
act seriously, while the press post positive green washing stories to keep spirits up
and not let confidence drop in the face of the disaster we’re not preparing
adequately for.
That’s also human nature.
R_Jay101 · 10h · edited 10h
Derbyshire
The problem is, under FPTP, our electoral system isnt representative... at all.
The Greens get a similar number of votes to the SNP yet only get 1 MP. If we
actually fixed our system, people would be more liable to vote for smaller
parties like the Greens without thinking they're just throwing their vote away or
making victory easier for a party they hate.
Villanta · 9h
I really like the idea of a carbon tax and think it would singlehandedly solve climate
change. but if we as a country did it, it will just force polluters to do business elsewhere
with not much benefit, a carbon tax needs to be global because pollution is global.

liquidmini · 11h
Somerset   Search     Free 
If it's done by looking at the carbon generated by the product /litre /kg, and done in a
similar fashion to the energy ratings of applicances, I don't see a problem with this.
If it's done by an offset by buying into carbon credit, or platinum vagaziled member status
of the Carbon Trust, then it's about as useful as a knitted condom.
humdrumoflife · 22h
Sounds like it might just be another example of the red tractor which has come under a lot
of criticism as becoming quite meaningless.
pajamakitten · 1d
Dorset
Let's hope it further discourages consumption of animal products. We also need more
information about what fruits and vegetables are in season in the UK. You might see it in
food magazines but a large poster in the fruit and vegetables section would be much more
informative.
Grumpyolerobot · 23h
You have a point, I'm old enough to remember seasonal fruit and veg but with our need
to import we get all year produce. Changes from animal to vegetable farming will be
seasonal production, so maybe the consumer will have to get used to that when it
happens.
Loreki · 14h · edited 14h
Nestlé are involved, so it's guaranteed the scheme will have exceptionally low standards. In
any serious scheme Nestlé products would pretty much universally score poorly.
I have a strong suspicion that this is just a way for brands to greenwash or attack
competitors as "less green" than the products of the member brands, while none of the
products on offer are particularly green.
Grayson81 · 1d
London
This is good news.
I’m a meat eater (apologies to the brigaders who usually show up to these discussions
Free in the
  Search    
UK sub) but I would like the negative impact of my diet to be as low as possible while still

including the food I enjoy.
If this labelling eventually become accurate, it will help those of us who give a shit (but who
aren’t prepared to give up meat and dairy) to try to reduce the harm we are doing.
sixteenlions · 1d
Seems the best thing meat-eaters can do is to reduce consumption of products from
cows because of the gasses produced (i.e cow farts). Swapping to oat milk & eating less
beef is certainly a start
Somerset
I eat meat but very rarely eat beef. I probably eat it twice a year. Milk though.. I guzzle
that stuff and can't abide any of the alternatives.
sixteenlions · 22h
Similar here - I found that only eating beef at restaurants helped as I knew chefs
would cook it better, whereas chicken is fairly simple
BOL0CKS · 23h
Tried almond milk but it tastes like shite. Beef alts are not bad tho had some decent
veggy burgers recently.
 -1   Reply Share 
britnveg · 23h
Tried almond milk but it tastes like shite.
Hence why the person you replied to recommended oat milk.
BOL0CKS · 23h
Il av to giv it a go. But that almond shite was dire.
britnveg · 22h
Honestly, oat (barista style) is very, very similar to dairy. I haven’t drank dairy
 
for 2Search
years so whenever anyone comes round  they have oat milk.
 Free
Nobody 
has started rejecting my offer of hot drinks yet!
Slink_Wray · 6h
Honestly, the taste and texture of alt milks vary dramatically from brand to
brand. Almond not be your thing, but there's still oat, hazelnut, pea, soy,
coconut, and probably yet more I can't recall off the top of my head. This is
what I drink - eco credentials are solid, it's nice in porridge and milkshakes,
and the protein content is much better than some of the others (the
company also do an unsweetened version if that's more you, too):
https://www.tesco.com/groceries/en-GB/products/308099152
soljey · 23h
Try oat milk. Almond and soya taste like death in comparison.
Squishy-Cthulhu · 23h
Blasphemy! Soy is godlike.
Loreki · 14h
Unfortunately the biggest way to reduce the impact of meat (or anything, really) is to
reduce consumption.
eairy · 5h
Or just stop everyone having any more kids? Or just mass suicide? Yes, these are
stupid ideas that will never work, just like your idea. People are not voluntarily going
to return to a pre-industrial society.
 -1
Revlash · 19h
Buy from a butchers instead of a supermarket. That will have a much bigger impact than
this likely will.
wild_biologist · 12h
On welfare it well can. From environmental perspectives, it's far more muddied.
Broadly, the same cattle go to local butchers and supermarkets. Butchers are
  Search     Free
generally more selective though, so it may be the better of the bunch. If you look at

Morrisons, they actually have their own abattoirs and know their supply chain better
than nearly anyone.
Little tid bit: you can buy meat at your local butcher and it could be from the same
herd as a steak in Waitrose or a burger in McDonalds.
Revlash · 4h
Broadly, the same cattle go to local butchers and supermarkets.
This hasn't been true for a long time, Consortiums for meat and exclusive non-
supermarket partnerships are on the rise. It might be true for cities where local
produce is harder to come by but certainly untrue nationwide. Supermarkets will
contract the lowest price every time, so Scottish/Irish meat is stocked in
Supermarkets with plenty of local meat available.
Buying meat from Supermarkets is a long term failure of the market with at least
some blame on the EU (which is a hard pill to swallow for this sub). Even in the
greenbelt, the big supermarkets simply cannot source enough local meat at a
competitive price because the large order discount cannot be obtained. Even
Morrisons is still anti-competitive at this point.
Granted there is some crossover of locally sourced meat indirectly but, farmers
markets/butchers are far more competitive about quality, flavour, texture and
localisation than supermarkets will ever be.
I didn't want to say it earlier because the downvote brigaders were out but the
biggest impact this country can ever have in the short or medium term is to move
from a nation of Beef lovers to Lamb lovers. Even more so than any scheme the
government can come out with that would pass. Not even a carbon tax would
come close.
wild_biologist · 3h · edited 2h
Farms sell direct to abattoirs, which then sell on to the supermarkets. There is
some control in that chain, in that supermarkets and butchers can specifically
get beef from certain farms and have contracts relating to that. I've had some
of our cattle bought by a butcher from the abattoir so that we can get cuts
back. Generally though, we sell to the abbatoir and they sell on to whoever they
want. This is prime beef cattle, grass fed, very strong genetics and sirage, top
top welfare.
To be clear, the pricing abattoirs give is based on the EUROP grid and a few
other minor factors - it pertains very little to quality.
Independent butchers haven't the throughput to utilise all the cattle from their
local
farms.
Search     Free
Most farms, other than small holdings, will sell to a variety of

sources including supermarkets. Many herds will supply Sainsbury's,
McDonalds, and your local farm shop.
Take a farmer near me, absolute top rated beef by any account, including the
beef specialists I work with. He sells in his own farm shop, farmers market, and
a local third party farm shop, and a local butcher. He still has a contract with
major supermarket to supply beef to them.
ings0c · 20h · edited 20h
Knowing something is wrong and continuing to do it is pretty much the definition of not
giving a shit.
RandomlyGeneratedOne · 18h
Won't make any difference to my shopping list, price comes first.
wild_biologist · 12h · edited 1h
You're getting downvotes, but you're being honest and that's important.
Most consumers say they'd pay more for better welfare and environmental credentials,
but at the till, that's not the reality.
People not being honest about this stuff has caused plenty a problem!
Yep, its best we get this out in the open now rather then play pretend and waste time
on solutions which don't work.
 Vote
eairy · 5h
It's sad you're being downvoted when for a significant portion of people price is always
going to be first. Abstract ecological issues are always going to come second to feeding
yourself and your family.
No point in tiptoeing around problems like this, same goes for those calling for tax
 
increases Search
on food we'd
and energy products they'd rather  
just outright ban.Free 
 Vote
Lemon-sausage · 16h
This is why taxing is a better way to do it imo. If you want to buy a steak you can but it's
going cost you. Then this money can be used to subsise sustainable foods, energy or
transport
wild_biologist · 12h
An issue with taxation is the impact on lower income households. It will be difficult to
work it in the context of our current benefits system.
Lemon-sausage · 8h
Impact being the poor are forced into buying subsidised "green" food.
DreamingIntoTheVoid · 21h
I'll take this as a start, but we should also have labels to identitfy the working conditions in
which a product was made in aswell. With higher grades for being fully unionised, paid
vacation, 40 hour week, ingredients/components bought from other similarly protected
workplaces, etc.
Randomd0g · 12h
If cigarette boxes have to have pictures of diseased lungs then meat packaging should have
pictures of baby animals being slaughtered.
I think that'll be a much more effective way of getting people to eat greener food.
 Somerset

Unitedkingdom: Regional Subs Advice Subs

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Unitedkingdom: Regional Subs Advice Subs

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

28/06/2021 Traffic-light system of ‘eco-scores’ to be piloted on British food labels : unitedkingdom

Posts Regional Subs Advice Subs

Posted by u/altmorty 1 day ago

Traffic-light system of ‘eco-scores’ to be piloted on

 62 Comments  Award  Share  94% Upvoted

adobe.com/creativecloud/busine... Learn More

What are your thoughts?

View discussions in 7 other communities

siredmundsnaillary · 23h · edited 23h

I like the idea as well but the devil is in the details.

4  Reply Share 

So naturally, we need to add a scale. But it isn't just in balance of 2

There is definitely a lot of assessment that goes on in things like

Very interesting, thanks.

I suppose if the 'there is no ethical consumption under capitalism' quote

Bought 4 carbons worth of offset credits ? A++

Aye. Nestle backing it set alarm bells ringing in my head.

6  Reply Share 

1  Reply Share 

1  Reply Share 

Anything but actually regulating companies or implementing a Carbon tax.

6  Reply Share 

5  Reply Share 

I'm fully with you there.

Most consumers dont research the environmental impact of everything they

(Though I agree a proper carbon tax would be a much better move)

The trouble with saying it’s no responsibility of consumers, though, is that

The whole thing’s a round of corporate buck passing, between companies,

That’s also human nature.

1  Reply Share 

1  Reply Share 

3  Reply Share 

5  Reply Share 

6  Reply Share 

Loreki · 14h · edited 14h

2  Reply Share 

This is good news.

6  Reply Share 

2  Reply Share 

Tried almond milk but it tastes like shite.

Hence why the person you replied to recommended oat milk.

Il av to giv it a go. But that almond shite was dire.

3  Reply Share 

Blasphemy! Soy is godlike.

6  Reply Share 

3  Reply Share 

2  Reply Share 

3  Reply Share 

Broadly, the same cattle go to local butchers and supermarkets.

1  Reply Share 

ings0c · 20h · edited 20h

0  Reply Share 

Won't make any difference to my shopping list, price comes first.

0  Reply Share 

wild_biologist · 12h · edited 1h

3  Reply Share 

2  Reply Share 

4  Reply Share 

3  Reply Share 

1  Reply Share 

0  Reply Share 

You might also like