Let's start with the following principle: “Energy is the only universal currency: to do anything one must convert it into one of its many forms.Economies are simply complex systems set up to make those transformations, and all economically significant energy transformations have (often highly undesirable) environmental impacts. Consequently, as far as the biosphere is concerned, the best anthropogenic energy conversions are those that never occur: no emissions of gases (be they greenhouse or acidic), no generation of solid or liquid wastes, no disruption of ecosystems. Not destruction. The best way to do this is to convert energy with high efficiency: without adopting them widely (be it in large diesel and jet-engines, combined-cycle gas turbines, light-emitting diodes, steel smelting or ammonia synthesis ) ) We will need to convert significantly more primary energy with all the associated environmental impacts.
Conversely, what could be more wasteful, more undesirable, and more irrational than negating a large portion of these conversion benefits by wasting them? Yet it certainly continues to occur – and to an indefinitely high degree – with all final energy uses. Buildings consume about one-fifth of all global energyBut due to inadequate wall and ceiling insulation, single-pane windows and poor ventilation, they waste at least a fifth to a third of it, compared to well-designed indoor spaces. A typical SUV is now twice as heavy as a typical pre-SUV vehicle, and requires at least a third more energy to do the same work.
The most egregious of these wasteful practices is our food production. Claims to be close to the modern food system (from breeding new varieties, synthesizing fertilizers and other agrochemicals, and building field machinery to the energy used in harvesting, transportation, processing, storage, retailing, and cooking). Is. 20 percent of the world's fuel and primary electricity-and we waste just as much 40 percent of all produced food. Some food waste is inevitable. However, prevalent food waste is more than unavoidable. This is criminal in many ways.
It is difficult to combat this for many reasons. First, there are many ways to waste food: from loss in the field to spoilage in storage, from perishable seasonal surpluses to keeping the “correct” display in stores, from large portions when eaten outside the home. Until the fall in home cooking.
Second, Food travels a long way now Before reaching consumers: The average distance traveled by a typical food item is 1,500 to 2,500 miles Before being purchased.
third, it remains very cheap Regarding other expenses. Despite recent food-price increases, households now spend only approx. 11 percent of their disposable income on food (in 1960 it was about 20 percent). The expense of eating away from home (generally more extravagant than eating at home) is now more than half of that total. And finally, as consumers, we have overwhelming food choices available to us: Just consider that the average American supermarket now offers more goods than 30,000 food products,
Our society is apparently quite content to waste 40 percent of the approximately 20 percent of energy it spends on food. In 2025, unfortunately, this shocking level of waste will not receive much attention. In fact, the situation will get worse. While we will continue to spend billions of dollars looking for energy “solutions” – from new nuclear reactors (even fusion!) to green hydrogen, they all carry their own environmental burdens – in 2025, we Will fail to address the huge waste of food that takes a lot of fuel and electricity to produce.