Energy, food, and branding

Looks like its time for another one of my connection blogs. This one is again from the folks over at Treehugger (in an effort to be more transparent, I should mention that the information originally came from The Oil Drum) and is about the energy input to calorie output of foods.

 
I am glad I found this, as I always have trouble explaining to people my stance as a vegetarian and this article puts it into an understandable info graphic. While I do value the lives of non-human animals and think that we have a moral obligation to not kill them unless necessary, the main reason I became a vegetarian was for energy efficiency.

Simply put we (humans and the U.S. in particular) waste so much energy, clean water, and resources to produce meat that is completely unnecessary for our survival. I don't deny that eating meat was necessary for human survival at one point in our history, but it isn't now. To me, eating meat is a luxury that too many people simply take for granted. That being said, I don't like being a preachy vegetarian and I think that people should be able to make their own decisions about what they do and don't eat.

Bringing this post back onto the topic of green branding I would like to consider two things.

The first, is that people need to be more informed about the environmental impact of what they eat. It seems to me that most people don't realize that eating meat has such a big impact.  Most people eat meat because they have been raised and taught through the media to think that meals are incomplete without it. More articles like this one need to be written and expanded upon. I would like to see someone (more scientifically qualified then myself) create an extensive database on foods and their energy usage and impact. This could help people who are trying to reduce their impact make better informed decisions about what they are eating.

This information could also be used by food companies to talk about their impacts, and could be used to help brand companies that create vegetarian options.

Second, Ive noticed that the market for organic, free-range, grass fed meat is growing. While this does reduce the impact of meat I think that some of these companies are toeing the line on green washing. Like this article on Time Magazine's website, that talks about how grass-fed beef could "save the planet" I think it doesn't address both sides of the issue very well. Not eating meat is still much better than eating grass-fed meat.

Vegetables are still better to eat than cows.

 To me, companies that are saying their organic, free-range, grass fed meat is good for the environment are like water companies saying their bottles are recyclable or paper companies saying their products are recycled (yet contain a small percentage of post-consumer waste). While is is true that these products are better for the environment to a small-degree, saying they are good for the environment is green washing.