75 Grams: The Carbon Footprint of One Bag of Potato Crisps

While I like the idea of being able to compare the carbon footprint of two comparable items, I find it hard to believe that these numbers alone will allow optimization.

For instance, the delivery only accounts for 9% of the footprint of that item, while growing and processing accounts for 77%. Moving the manufacturing closer to the point of sale may reduce the footprint of the delivery process, but perhaps doing so would reduce the efficiency of the farming and manufacturing processes, which are much more heavily weighted.

Compared to meat products, this is in the basement. The product is vegetarian, low in moisture, limiting transport waste, has a very long shelf life, and doesn't need chemical ingredients. Also, the potato is sliced so thinly there is a minimum of cooking.

Also, potatoes can be grown anywhere. It's not like bringing in pineapples from Africa or the Phillipines.

If I were to attack a food product for its carbon footprint, it isn't the worthy fried potatoe.

I like this idea because it brings the carbon footprint of products to the fore. Now producers have a real issue - if they don't care about carbon outputs they'll be labelled with higher numbers, and an increasingly informed buying public may turn away - leading to lost revenue. This may attach a very real economic incentive to cut carbon emissions where possible. As a consideration - maybe companies could plant trees as a method of lowering their label if they can't find ways of reducing their foot print through other means. Sort of an offset. I just hope that with all this focus on Carbon Footprints that other, equally important aspects of environmental sustainability aren't left in the dust.

I'm not attacking the carbon footprint of potato chips per se. And I entirely agree that meat-based products have a far greater impact. I just thought it was interesting to see how this broke down.

Yeah, but who has the time to make their own bag of potato chips? That's economically inefficient. We depend on other companies to provide us with products so we don't have to worry about providing ourselves with these things, and instead focus on other tasks- like a job.

You should have said, "Or we can lower our consumption level of potato chips."

God I love Japan! Bacon and Egg flavored potato chips! Yummy!

How much does 75g of offsets run nowadays?

Ok, being serious, I do love this idea. There is no reason that this type of information should be terribly challenging to measure to within a reasonable degree and give to the consumer.

All good points. Here's a graph of CO2 emissions:

http://www.sightline.org/maps/charts/climate-CO2byMode

The average US car, one occupant, emits 1.1-1.2 pounds per mile.

Walk or bike to the store, or plan ahead and make fewer trips.

I've made homemade chips for a lark or when low on money. You're probably better off buying commercial chips--industry is really efficient at such jobs and you probably can't beat mass-production with a deep frier even if you have one of those tiny B&D deep friers they sold when I was a college student. It's just energy-inefficient and time-consuming. Also, I always worry when I use a knife or a deep frier.

I suspect it's based on:

http://www.walkerscarbonfootprint.co.uk/walkers_carbon_footprint.html
http://www.forumforthefuture.org/greenfutures/articles/carbonsvitalstats

Actually, I would speculate that making your own is probably less energy-efficient, unless you grow and hand-harvest your own potatoes. But purely the "processing" slice of emissions from a factory is probably less than from heating up a pot of oil in your own kitchen every time you want a bowl of crisps. Economies of scale and all that.

This is a fantastic means of raising awareness, outlining 'the other cost' alongside the monetary price of a product, and it's about time too.

But though I love the concept, the method of measuring and calculating these things is extremely complex by all accounts. Which isn't to say the idea won't work in raising awareness (AND even reducing emissions long term) as it truly in my opinion, but with such complexities in the calculations and measurements the integrity of it could become questionable.

But I love it, and it's certainly an idea we at Socks for Happy People have been discussing since we began as a company. The challenge is how to make it genuinely work long-term...but I think it can be done!

Go good people of the world! Make it work!!!

Rich : )

What do you think? Can this be accurate, authentic and true? What would make it so?

Will the general public understand this on there food packaging? Will people still purchase high footprint items just because the one on the shelf next to it is a few points higher making them think they are making a difference, when trully they should do there best to purchase locally grown. Or renewable energy manufactured products.
I still think its a great idea, because people like me and my family who are just becoming educated on our carbon footprints does understand this and will make us think twice. And soon everyone will be educated and want to cut down on each's energy consumptions.
See ya!!!

I hate to say this but these potato chips (and all others) are 100% pure junk food. We do nothing good for our bodies and our planet when we waste our resources and caloric allotments on foods that provide ZERO nutritional value.

As Micheal Pollan says: "Eat (real) food. Not too much. Mostly plants."