Thursday, 14 October 2010

Is It Me, Or Is There A Hidden Agenda Here?

So, not a full week after we found out that all the labels confused the hell out of shoppers, as well as (ultimately) costing them more, we find there’s going to be another one:
Shoppers familiar with seeing fair trade, organic or rainforest labels during their weekly shop will have to get used to another logo: the carbon footprint.
Oh, perfect…
The Centre for Retail Research forecasts that annual sales of the Carbon Reduction Label run by the publicly funded Carbon Trust would hit £2bn by the end of 2010, putting it behind only the Red Tractor farm assurance scheme (£10bn), but ahead of the Soil Association's organic mark (£1.5bn); Fairtade (£800m); RSPCA Freedom Foods (£800m), and the smaller Rainforest Alliance and Marine Stewardship Council schemes.
In other words, it’s expected to be bigger and better than all the other useless little logos that are plastered all over our food packaging.
Tesco has been the most enthusiastic supporter of the scheme, carrying out a commitment made three years ago to carbon label all of its 70,000 food lines.
Really? Then this just goes to show how utterly pointless it is, as I shopped at Tesco on Tuesday and I didn’t even notice…

I note, however, that there may well be a hidden agenda here, even beyond the ecofacists usual plans:
However, other products have not been included, possibly because shoppers would be put off by how much pollution they generate. Meat has "astronomical" emissions according to one supermarket source, something borne out by research. A study by Japan's National Institute of Livestock and Grassland Science found three years ago that 1kg of beef released the equivalent of 36kg of CO2.
How interesting…

And it doesn’t stop there:
Alcohol, too, has high emissions. While a 330ml can of Coca-Cola has 170 grams, Adnams eco-bitter East Green has 432 grams per half-litre.
Hmmm….

What are their long-term goals, I wonder?
Currently, these insights are interesting, but they could become more important. Two years ago the Commons Environmental Audit committee said the Government should give everyone a personal carbon allowance.
If we won’t voluntarily go veggie, they’ll find a way to price it out of existence. And the same for alcohol.
Euan Murray, the Carbon Trust's head of footprinting, said he did not know if all products would eventually be carbon labelled, but added: "We are increasingly seeing people recognise that things have a carbon footprint, and they want to do something about it."
I don’t.

I think you’ll find most people won’t, either, when they realise what it’ll mean for them…

Let's hope that the food industry doesn't simply roll over for this. The tobacco industry, as Leg-Iron points out, seems to be a lost cause. They clearly never heeded the advice of Winston Churchill on feeding crocodiles...
at

8 comments:

  1. Anonymous14 October 2010 at 10:33

    Once the green weed takes over the planet earth only the elites will eat meat ,the peasents will live on cereals as they toil the fields.
    Well the ones who havent been murdered by the green NKVD .

    ReplyDelete
  2. Roue le Jour14 October 2010 at 11:45

    "...the Government should give everyone a personal carbon allowance."

    I missed that one. So, that would be like the ration book my mum told me about? You have the money for a steak, but you can't have one because you haven't got the coupons?

    One of the things that piddles me off is people saying the UK is nothing like the old USSR, but in fact it is, it's just cleverer. If the UK gov doesn't want you to do something, it doesn't ban it, it fiddles the tax system to make it uneconomic. Like adding VAT to gold. Actually. I'm waiting for the US to pick up that one.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Dr Evil14 October 2010 at 12:51

    AGW is an utter fabrication. Of course we are warming up. We are finally losing the last vestiges of the ice age. Normally there is no ice at the poles (in geological time of course). So I'm not bothered by this silly carbon footprint nonsense regarding labels. I do find an individual carbon allowance a bit sinister though.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Brian, follower of Deornoth14 October 2010 at 21:25

    I find the Sainsbury's labelling system the most helpful. You can be sure that the things with the most orange and red in the labelling system taste the best. Anything that's all green...well, you should chuck it straight down the toilet and cut out the middle man.

    ReplyDelete
  5. JuliaM15 October 2010 at 05:27

    "I missed that one. So, that would be like the ration book my mum told me about? "

    Sounds pretty much like it. Except, of course, there was a good reason for your mum's ration book...

    "So I'm not bothered by this silly carbon footprint nonsense regarding labels. I do find an individual carbon allowance a bit sinister though."

    Me too.

    "I find the Sainsbury's labelling system the most helpful. You can be sure that the things with the most orange and red in the labelling system taste the best."

    Good point! :)

    ReplyDelete
  6. David Gillies15 October 2010 at 07:58

    Since I am not a drooling moron and I have multiple science/engineering degrees, labels do not confuse me. The introduction of carbon footprint labels would, however, enable me to select those products most likely to make Jonathan Porritt cry. So on the whole, I'm in favour.

    ReplyDelete
  7. AntiCitizenOne15 October 2010 at 12:28

    I think people will be more interested in forceful self-regulation of bureaucrat reduction.

    i.e. a mob and heads on pikes.

    ReplyDelete
  8. JuliaM16 October 2010 at 05:36

    "The introduction of carbon footprint labels would, however, enable me to select those products most likely to make Jonathan Porritt cry. So on the whole, I'm in favour."

    Heh! Good point.

    "i.e. a mob and heads on pikes."

    Sadly, even on the continent, they haven't gone that far. Yet.

    ReplyDelete