Post on 26-Mar-2016
description
HISTORY & EFFECTS OF THE FOOD WASTE EPIDEMICOVERLOADFOOD
FOOD OVERLOAD HIST
OR
Y &
EFFE
CT
S OF T
HE
FOO
D W
AST
E E
PID
EM
IC D
ESIG
NE
D A
ND
CO
MP
ILED
BY
BIA
NC
A FR
AN
K
DESIGNED AND COMPILED BY
BIANCA FRANK
FOODOVERLOAD
HISTORY & EFFECTS OF THE FOOD WASTE EPIDEMIC
HISTORY & EFFECTS OF THE FOOD WASTE EPIDEMICOVERLOADFOOD
DESIGNED AND COMPILED BY
BIANCA FRANK
FOOD OVERLOADHISTORY & EFFECTS OF THE FOOD WASTE EPIDEMIC
Book design copyright 2011 by Bianca Frank
Published by Bianca Frank for course GR434,
Typography 4, instructor Lian Ng, Spring 2011
Academy of Art University, San Francisco, CA.
Bound at The Key, Oakland, California
All rights reserved.
DEDICATION This book is dedicated to those that
continue to inspire me everyday. The
designers that have come before me, and
the artists that will continue to inspire me
throughout my career.
I hope to show that in all of this our
motivation in life and in the pursuit of our
dreams is only stopped by our own inabil-
ity to see the final outcome.
To my son, to all of my friends and family
that have pushed me along and stood
beside me through this difficult journey.
Thank you for being the source of my con-
tinued inspiration.
Love Always, Bianca
DEDICATION 15
AMERICANSHAVE MORE FOOD
TO EAT THAN ANY OTHER PEOPLE IN THE WORLD AND MORE DIETSTO KEEP THEM FROM
EATING IT
TABLE OF
INTRODUCTION FOOD WASTE
CHAPTER 4 WASTE REDUCTION
CHAPTER 1 WHAT IS IT?
CHAPTER 5 TIPS TO AVOID IT
CONTENTS
19
61
25
71
CHAPTER 2 WASTE & OBESITY
CHAPTER 3 CAUSES OF LOSS
CHAPTER 6 PROMOTING CHANGE
FOOD WASTE GLOSSARY
35 51
79 89
FOOD WASTE
INTRODUCTION
There is no questioning the fact that Americans live in a culture of excess. We constantly
take our dwindling natural resources for granted and create millions of tons of waste in
the process. Food is no exception. In todays society, going green has become some-
thing of a buzzword. Media outlets constantly cover businesses and individuals that have
gone green in their practices. Products are popping up everywhere with labels such
as All-Natural, Plant-based ingredients,and Organic. Even the color green is being
plastered on every marketable product or group.
HOW ARE CITIES COPING?
Some cities have issued instructions for
all city-supported organizations, such as
schools, libraries, and government institu-
tions, to clean up their acts and become
more environmentally-friendly. Many of
the cities and communities alike are fol-
lowing these precedents. America realizes
the necessity to reduce its waste and im-
pact the environment in positive ways, the
need arises to implement initiatives that
counteract the massive food waste epi-
demic. The best possible way to achieve
this is to initiate a hierarchy of food waste
recovery that integrates a combination
of strategies which productively utilizes
surplus food and reduces waste.
Among a slew of problems which draw
frequent attention lays a critical issue
that the majority of Americans overlook
on a daily basis: the increasing waste of
food. It accounts for the single-largest
component by weight in the waste stream
of the United States and has significant
environmental, economic, and cultural
ramifications (EPA). How often do people
think about what happens to the food that
is tossed in the trash unopened or left on
to plates after meals? While there are a
multitude of easy alternatives that can be
taken to reduce the amount of food waste,
there is an obvious need to implement
a program that has a radical impact on
the amount of this waste that is sent to
landfills as this problem cannot continue
at the current rate. The best solution to
the problem of excessive food waste is to
implement a specific hierarchy of waste
disposal. These programs need to be en-
forced through laws and regulations, thus
making this solution the most effective,
and feasible, and affordable.INTRODUCTION 23
A surplus of food wasnt always a problem in the
United States. Often food lines stretched for
miles. The over abundance of availability of food
in the marketplace increases the food waste
epidemic.
FOOD WASTE BY REGIONS IN THE U.S.
Where you live in the United States deter-
mines what is being done in your localized
area regarding food waste. The following
pages will explore what, if anything, is
being changed and how where you live
affects food waste.
Region 1 includes New Hampshire, Ver-
mont, Connecticut, Maine, Rode Island,
and Massachusetts
Education and outreach are primary con-
cerns of several composting programs in
Region 1. Connecticut and New Hamp-
shire provide school composting guides,
while Maine and Massachusetts sponsor
composting workshops. Food scraps, a
compost waste stream, are being studied
in pilot programs and projects in Con-
necticut, Maine, and Massachusetts.
Region 2 includes New York, New Jersey
To increase solid waste reduction, states
in Region 2 are composting. Encompass-
ing sewage sludge (biosolids) from public-
ly-owned treatment works (POTWs); food
residuals recycling from food recovery
programs; industrial organic waste from
food processing facilities; used paper
products; yard waste; or other organic
materials, New Yorks organic waste re-
cycling program recycles nearly 2 million
tons of organic waste (1998). New Jerseys
program focuses primarily on yard waste,
and has removed significant amounts of
material from the waste stream.
Region 3 includes Pennsylvania, Deleware,
West Virginia, Virginia and Maryland
Concerned with reducing waste, states in
Region 3 have made composting a prior-
ity, focusing on yard waste. The vegetative
waste management and yard waste com-
posting regulations in Virginia allow com-
posting of leaves, grass, brush and other
collected material, but not composting
of land-clearing debris. Guidelines have
been written for yard waste compost-
ing facilities and provide instructions on
recycling options.
Region 4 includes Kentucky, Tennessee,
North & South Carolina, Georgia, Missis-
sippi, Alabama and Florida
Tips from states located in this region help
municipal, home, and commercial com-
posters. Guidance includes fact sheets
on how to compost, technical assistance
publications, and rules and regulations.
Providing pollution prevention and waste
reduction information specifically for the
green industries.
Region 5 includes Minnesota, Michigan,
Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio
Yard and tree wastes are banned from
landfills in Minnesota, Indiana, and
Wisconsin. With the hopes of reducing
household waste generated in Region 5,
the states provide information primarily
for home composters. Many municipalities
and businesses in Indiana are also part of
the compost market. The Indiana Recy-
cling Grants Program encourages envi-
ronmental beneficial results through grant
opportunities, public recognition awards,
broad-based educational programs and
technical assistance.
FOOD OVERLOAD HISTORY & EFFECTS OF THE FOOD WASTE EPIDEMIC24
25
Region 6 includes New Mexico, Oklahoma,
Arkansas, Texas and Louisiana
To learn more about compost and how to
compost, producers and users can visit
websites from states in Region 6. Provid-
ing step-by-step directions, you can learn:
how to start composting, what materials
can be composted, if the compost needs
to be in a bin, what temperature the com-
post should be, what needs to be done to
the compost to allow the organics to de-
compose, and how compost can be used.
Texas legislation provides incentives for
composting to reduce materials landfilled
by 15 percent.
Region 7 includes Nebraska, Iowa, Kansas,
and Missouri
By diverting organic materials from land-
fills, states in Region 7 not only reduce
waste, but they expand the market for
recycled materials and improve soil condi-
tions. Missouri, Kansas and Iowa pro-
vide users with detailed instructions for
composting, mulching and grasscycling.
Each state includes pertinent information
about materials that can and cannot be
recycled through organics recycling. To
encourage the organics market develop-
ment in Iowa, the state offers a rebate to
any non-residential purchaser of compost
purchasing compost for the first time
through programs.
Region 8 includes Montana, North & South
Dakota, Wyoming, Utah and Colorado
States in this region are making strides to
reduce the amount of waste that could be
composted from entering landfills. Each
state provides backyard composting tips
to homeowners and others interested in
the effort. In 2003, Montana added 3,000
composting systems through the Back-
yard Gold project and diverted nearly
1000 tons of material from landfills, as
well as improving Montana soil.
Region 9 includes California, Nevada,
Arizona and Hawaii
States in this region encourage homeown-
ers, renters, commercial businesses and
institutions to reduce the amount of green
waste they produce by composting. A sur-
vey was conducted in 2000 to provide the
California Integrated Waste Management
Board with information on the number of
producers, feedstock sources, products,
and markets for compost and mulch. The
Waste Board provides regulatory oversight
and marketing assistance to compost and
mulch producers.
Region 10 includes Alaska, Washington,
Idaho and Oregon
Composting facilities in Oregon and
Washington are regulated to protect hu-
man health and the environment. Large
facilities in Oregon, and those handling
non-green feedstocks substances that
pose a present or future hazard to human
health or the environment; and substanc-
es that are high-in, and likely to support,
human pathogens must comply with more
healthful protections.
FOOD WASTE WHAT IS IT?
67
8
9
10
FOOD WASTE BY REGION
Region 1
New Hampshire, Vermont,
Connecticut, Maine, Rode Island, Massachusetes
Region 2
New York, New Jersey
Region 3
Pennsylvania, Deleware, West Virginia, Virginia,
Maryland
Region 4
Kentucky, Tennessee, North & South Carolina, Geor-
gia, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida
Region 5
Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana,
Ohio
Region 6
New Mexico, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Texas, Louisiana
Region 7
Nebraska, Iowa, Kansas,
Missouri
Region 8
Montana, North & South
Dakota, Wyoming, Utah, Colorado
Region 9
California, Nevada, Arizona, Hawaii
Region 10
Alaska, Washington, Idaho, Oregon
Calories from the U.S. Per Capita Food Sup-
ply, Adjusted for Losses, Increased 19 Percent
between 1983 and 2000. Rounded to the nearest
hundred not calculated for years before 1970.
1
2
3
4
5
FOOD WASTE
CHAPTER 1 WHAT EXACTLY IS
The U.S. food supply is the most varied and abundant in the world. Americans spend
a smaller share of their disposable income on food than citizens of any other country
and choose from an average of 50,000 different food products on a typical outing to the
supermarket. In 1994, the food supply provided an estimated 3,800 calories per person
per day, enough to supply every American with more than one and a half times their
average daily energy needs. Given this abundance, few of the Nations resources have
traditionally been devoted to measuring or reducing food waste.
THE HISTORY OF FOOD WASTE
According to a study in 1996 by the U.S.
Department of Agriculture, one of the
few actually conducted on food waste,
more than 96.4 billion pounds of the 356
billion pounds of edible food was never
eaten. This turns out to be about three
thousand pounds per second or about one
pound of food per person per day (USDA).
With 36 million Americans struggling to
eat each day, there is no excuse for these
overwhelming numbers (Census Bureau).
Food waste is currently the third largest
component of municipal solid waste
residential and commercial trashin the
United States, which accounts for about
12% of the total waste stream and falls
only behind paper products and yard trim-
mings (Figure 1). However, it is important
to note that while over half of these two
leading components are recovered for
composting, less that 3% of all food waste
was recovered last Possible Strategies for
Reduction These statistics should be a big
wake-up call for urgent attention. In lieu
of this problem, there are many solu-
tions to the dilemma of Americas serious
excessive food waste; however, four
prominent solutions should be analyzed
as movements towards a more waste-free,
environmentally-friendly community. The
first solution targets the heart of Ameri-
can consumerismthe household. This
method would attempt to make citizens
aware of the large quantity of food that is
wasted and educate each citizen on ben-
eficial ways to reduce, reuse, and recycle.
At its basis, this solution would consist
of year. These figures do not take into ac-
count the food waste that was industrially
generated during packaging, processing,
and transporting (EPA, Municipal 2007).
Furthermore, the remaining 97% of food
waste ends up rotting in a landfill. This
process produces methane gas which is
about twenty-one times more potent than
carbon dioxide and a large component of
greenhouse gases. In fact, globally, land-
fills are the largest human-related source
of methane emissions, and the United
States is the leading contributor with close
to 30% of all emissions (EPA). Of course,
eliminating food waste will not solve all of
the problems of world hunger or green-
house-gas pollution; however, it could be
a small step in the right direction without
a huge amount of effort or money.
FOOD OVERLOAD HISTORY & EFFECTS OF THE FOOD WASTE EPIDEMIC30
Historical transformations have changed
the type and amount of food waste gener-
ated. Hunter-gatherer cultures often dis-
carded bones as their only primary food
waste. The development of agriculture
added more plant materials to the food
waste stream. Industrialized agriculture
increased organic waste by-products from
large-scale food processing. Increased
population growth and urbanization along
with multiplied and concentrated the
amount of food waste, which was increas-
ingly dumped as the cities that gener-
ated waste became located farther from
agricultural areas.
Historical shifts occurred in the concep-
tion of food waste. The term garbage
originated in the French word for entrails
and once referred exclusively to food
waste. Later the word signified all refuse,
since food waste embodies the most un-
acceptable characteristics of solid waste,
putrefaction and attraction of vermin.
Material prosperity reduces the eco-
nomic necessity for food conservation
and reuse, and conspicuous consumption
and disposal are demonstrations of social
status. Food in postindustrial societies is
inexpensive relative to total income, and
wasting food is increasingly accepted.
Technology that improves the durability
of foods, such as plastic packaging, has
reduced food waste from spoilage but
has created a new waste problem as food
packaging contributes more to the waste
stream than food itself. Regardless of
consumption and disposal practices, the
growing world population has increased
food waste.
FOOD WASTE WHAT IS IT? 31
WARONWASTEDO WITHOUT THAT SECOND HELPING, THAT EXTRA SNACK, UNLESS YOU REALLY NEED THEM. TURN TODAYS SCRAPS INTO TOMOROWS SOUPS AND SAVORUIES. OUR WASTE IS HITLERS WEAPON.
During World War II food rationing, and food
conservation awareness was at its peak. A slew
of imagery and posters were displayed all over
the world depicting citizens political responsi-
bility to their country of origin to be weary of
food waste.
THE DEFINITION OF FOOD WASTE
The definition of waste is a contended
subject, often defined on each situational
basis, so it follows that food waste is the
same;professional bodies, including inter-
national organizations, state governments
and secretariats may formally have their
very own definitions.
Food waste is any food substance, raw or
cooked, which is discarded, or intended
or required to be discarded, according
to the legal definition of waste by the EU
Commission. Since there are several defi-
nitions of waste, equally many definitions
of food waste exist; professional bodies,
including international organizations,
state governments and secretariats may
formally have their own definitions.
The United States Environmental Protec-
tion Agency defines food waste for the
United States as being: Uneaten food and
food preparation wastes from residences
and commercial establishments such as
grocery stores, restaurants, and produce
stands, institutional cafeterias and kitch-
ens, and industrial sources like employee
lunchrooms. Although it is a nation-wide
agency, states are free to define food
waste individually, according to policies,
preference and other definitions,though
many choose not to.
Overall, the definition of food waste can
vary in many ways, including, but not lim-
ited to: what food waste consists of, how
food waste is produced, and where/what
it is discarded from/generated by. The
definition can be varied and complicated
by other issues; certain groups do not
consider (or have traditionally not consid-
ered) food waste to be a waste material,
due to its applications; some definitions of
what food waste consists of are based on
other waste definitions (e.g. agricultural
waste), and which materials do not meet
their definitions.
FOOD WASTE WHAT IS IT? 35
AMERICANOBESITY
CHAPTER 2 FOOD WASTE AND
IS FOOD MARKETING KILLING US?
One of the biggest contributors to obesity
and environmental degradation in the past
35 years has been the increasing sophisti-
cation of all facets of marketing to create
an environment where highly processed
and energy dense food is easily available
to those living in developed countries. Al-
though it is typically argued that lifestyles
have become more sedentary over this
time, it is pretty clear that consumers have
been encouraged to eat more through
highly sophisticated marketing activities,
including supply chain management (e.g.,
easy access to convenience and pro-
cessed food), pricing (e.g., reduced costs,
better value and longer perishability of
processed foods), as well as integrated
advertising campaigns, to purchase and
consume foods that provide a high fat,
high sugar, and high salt hit.
While these foods give an instant reward,
overconsumption has a cost to both the
environment, and to individual health.
The National Institute of Diabetes and
Digestive and Kidney Diseases in the
US and published in the peer-reviewed
journal PLoS One that a push effect of
marketing has contributed significantly to
obesity and environmental degradation do
not come as a surprise. However, the fact
that they have been able to calculate the
actual dimensions of the effect of food
waste and energy dense food consumed
by Americans provides compelling evi-
dence of the extent of this effect.
Ultimately, what this means is that politi-
cians and commentators need to do more
than blame consumers, telling them to
eat less and exercise more and start
to recognize that not all consumption
is good for the economy. While we have
increased our energy intake over the past
thirty years by more than 1000 calories,
other research suggests that physical
activity has not significantly declined over
that period. So, we are eating nearly 25
per cent more food over the past three
decades, but have not really changed our
activity levels (either way) over that time.
Indeed, marketers themselves need to
recognize that their activities have an
effect far beyond simply selling products.
When consumers make choices in their lo-
cal supermarket, it is the highly processed
and packaged foods that have a powerful
push effect. For example, although a 625
gram block of cheese (promoted as the
same price as 500 grams) is presented as
good value, the consumer will buy (and
consume) 125 grams more cheese than
they had planned, regardless of the dis-
count for buying in bulk, simply because it
was part of the deal.
This effect of consuming what we are
given create a consumption rebound ef-
fect, where consumers will increase their
consumption based on the availability
of the resource, and partly by our need
to consume the portion size that we are
given at time of consumption.
FOOD OVERLOAD HISTORY & EFFECTS OF THE FOOD WASTE EPIDEMIC38
POLITICIANSAND COMMENTATORS NEED TO DO MORE THAN BLAME CONSUMERS TELLING THEM TO EAT LESS AND EXERCISE MORE AND START TO RECOGNIZE THAT NOT ALL CONSUMPTION IS GOOD FOR THE ECONOMY.
THEPUSHEFFECT IF ONE IS GOOD MORE IS BETTER
THEPUSHEFFECT IF ONE IS GOOD MORE IS BETTER
The push effect is similar to the wealth effect,
where we adapt our lifestyle to suit our income,
rather than simply saving more as we earn more.
In the study of psychologyis also referred to as
the endowment effect and the prospect theory.
THE PUSH EFFECT HYPOTHESIS
One of the biggest contributors to obesity
and environmental degradation in the past
35 years has been the increasing sophisti-
cation of all facets of marketing to create
an environment where highly processed
and energy dense food is easily available
to those living in developed countries. Al-
though it is typically argued that lifestyles
have become more sedentary over this
time, it is pretty clear that consumers have
been encouraged to eat more through
highly sophisticated marketing activities,
including supply chain management (e.g.,
easy access to convenience and pro-
cessed food), pricing (e.g., reduced costs,
better value and longer perishability of
processed foods), as well as integrated
advertising campaigns, to purchase and
consume foods that provide a high fat,
high sugar, and high salt hit.
While these foods give an instant reward,
overconsumption has a cost to both the
entire environment, and to each indi-
viduals overall health. New findings by
Kevin Hall and all of his colleagues at the
National Institute of Diabetes and Diges-
tive and Kidney Diseases in the US and
published in the peer-reviewed journal
PLoS One that push effect of marketing
has contributed significantly to obesity
and environmental degradation does not
come as a surprise.
However, the fact that they have been
able to calculate the actual dimensions of
the effect of food waste and energy dense
food consumed by Americans provides
compelling evidence of the extent of this
effect, and easily translates to any Ameri-
can lifestyles.
Ultimately, what this means is that politi-
cians and commentators need to do more
than blame consumers, telling them to
eat less and exercise more and start
to recognise that not all consumption is
good for the economy. While we have
increased our energy intake over the past
thirty years by more than 1000 kilojoules
according to Hall, other research suggests
that physical activity has not significantly
declined over that period. So, we are eat-
ing nearly 25 per cent more food over
the past three decades, but have not really
changed our activity levels (either way)
over that time.
Indeed, marketers themselves need to
recognize that their activities have an
effect far beyond simply selling prod-
ucts. When consumers make choices in
many of their local supermarket, it is the
highly processed and packaged foods
that have a powerful push effect. For
example, although a 625 gram block of
cheese (promoted as the same price as
500 grams) is presented as good value,
the consumer will buy (and consume)
125 grams more cheese than they had
planned, regardless of the discount for
buying in bulk, simply because it was part
of the deal. This effect of consuming what
we are given might be partly explained
by the Jevons Paradox, or consumption
rebound effects, where consumers will
increase their consumption based on the
availability of the resource, and partly by
our need to consume the portion size that
we are given.
Similarly, consumers who are asked
whether they want fries with that, to up-
size, or choose a Value Meal instead of a
single burger, are being manipulated by a
psychological effect called the endow-
ment effect and explained by prospect
theory where they feel the pain of loss
more than the satisfaction of gain (it hurts
more to lose something than gain some-
thing) that ultimately leads them to
consume more than they actually need.
The push effect in this context is similar
to the wealth effect, where we adapt our
lifestyle to suit our income, rather than
simply saving more as we earn more.
Ultimately, access to highly processed,
energy dense food has meant that we
have increased our purchasing and eat-
ing behaviour (and our belts outward) to
catch up with its availability, rather than
continuing to consume as we always have.
The effect is devastating to both the envi-
ronment and to our health.
FOOD WASTE AND AMERICAN OBESITY 43
FOOD INCREASED
The calculated progressive increase of food
waste suggests that the US obesity epidemic has
been the result of a push effect of increased
food availability and marketing with Americans
being unable to match their food intake with
the increased supply of cheap, readily available
food, the authors wrote. Thus, addressing the
oversupply of food energy in the US may help
curb the obesity epidemic as well as decrease
food waste, which has profound environmental
consequences.
WASTE EPIDEMIC
A WASTEFUL EPIDEMIC
Americans waste about 1,400 calories
worth of food per person per day - or
40 percet of total their total food supply
with implications for climate change
and obesity. The researchers, from the
National Institute of Diabetes and Diges-
tive Kideny Diseases in Maryland, found
that food waste has increased 50% since
1974, reaching about 150 trillion calories
per year in 2003. This takes into account
wastage right along the food supply chain,
including waste from farms, manufactur-
ers , retailers and consumers.
For the food industry, reducing waste
could provide the dual benefits of lower
costs and imporoved environmental sus-
tainability as consumers are increasingly
taking ethical and environmental issues
into account at the checkout.
In addition, the authors argue that the
increase in food waste indicates an
excessive quantity of cheap food, which
could help to explain why the prevalence
of obesity has increased so rapidly from
15% in 1980 to 34.3%, with another 32.7%
overweight, according to the U.S. Depart-
ment of Health and Human Services.
INCREASED CALORIE INTAKE
Recent spikes in food prices have led to
increasing concern about global food
shortages and the apparent need to
increase agricultural production. Surpris-
ingly little discussion has been devoted
to the issue of food waste. Quantifying
food waste at a national level is difficult
because traditional methods rely on struc-
tured interviews, measurement of plate
waste, direct examination of garbage, and
application of inferential methods using
waste factors measured in sample popula-
tions and applied across the food system.
In contrast, national agricultural produc-
tion, utilization, and net external trade
are tracked and codified in detailed food
balance sheets published by the Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations. The food balance sheets provide
a comprehensive assessment of the main
national food supply, including alcohol
and beverages, adjusted for any change
of food stocks over the reference period.
Since 1974, there has been a big and
progressive increase in the per capita US
food supply. Over the same period, there
has also been an increase of body weight
as manifested by the US obesity epidemic.
We sought to estimate the energy content
of food waste by comparing the US food
supply data with the calculated food con-
sumed by the US population.
Energy from ingested food supports basal
metabolism and physical activities, both
of which are functions of body weight.
Surplus ingested energy is stored in the
body and is reflected by a change of body
weight. Because the average body weight
of the US population has been increasing
over the past 30 years, it is not immediate-
ly clear how much of the increased food
supply was ingested by the population.
Quantifying the food intake underlying an
observed change of body weight requires
knowing the energy cost of tissue deposi-
tion and the increased cost of physical
activity and metabolic rate with weight
gain. Here, we develop and validate a
mathematical model of human energy ex-
penditure that includes all of these factors
and used the model to calculate the aver-
age increase of food intake underlying the
observed increase of average adult body
weight in the US since 1974 as measured
by the US National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey (NHANES) .
FOOD OVERLOAD HISTORY & EFFECTS OF THE FOOD WASTE EPIDEMIC46
1,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
TOTAL FOOD SUPPLY AVAILABLE FOR CONSUMPTION
FOOD SUPPLY ADJUSTED FOR SPOILAGE, COOKING
LOSSES, PLATE WASTE AND OTHER LOSSES.
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000+
YEAR
CA
LOR
IES
Calories from the U.S. Food Supply, Adjusted
for Losses, Increased 19 Percent between 1983
and 2000. Rounded to the nearest hundred not
calculated for years before 1970.
150,000,000,000,00020
15
10
5
0
PERCENTAGE OF CHILDREN
PERCENTAGE OF ADULTS
PREVALENCE OF OVERWEIGHT PEOPLE
AMONG CHILDREN & ADULTS, BY YEAR.
1963-70 1971-74 1976-80 1988-94 1999-02
PE
RC
EN
T
150,000,000,000,000TOTALCALORIES WASTED
INCREASEDFOOD AVAILABILITY AND MARKETING
CREATESAMERICANSTHAT CAN NO LONGER
MANAGE PORTION CONTROL
Cutting portion sizes in half can contribute
significantly to your reduction of not only food
waste but also in increased calorie intake due to
large portion sizes.
FOODLOSS
CHAPTER 3 PRIMARY CAUSES OF
In countries who operate either commercial or industrial agriculture, food waste can
occur at most stages of the extensive food industry and in significant amounts. In
subsistence agriculture, the amounts of food waste are unknown but are likely to be in-
significant by comparison, due to the limited stages at which waste can occur, and given
that food is grown for projected need as opposed to a global marketplace demand.
Nevertheless, on-farm losses in storage in developing countries, can be high although
the exact amount is unknown.
FOOD WASTE IN FARMING
Food waste begins at farms. With lettuce,
for example, the average harvest rate has
been estimated at 85% to 90%. The rest
of the lettuceheads that dont look or
feel perfect on quick inspectionare left
in the field. One cucumber grower said
that at least half of the cucumbers on his
farms arent harvested,mostly because
they are too curved (making them hard to
pack) or have white spots or small cracks.
Farm losses are generally higher for hand-
picked fruit and perishable vegetables
than for machine-harvested commod-
ity crops like corn and wheat; about 9%
of commodity crops planted in the U.S.
arent harvested.
LOST IN TRANSIT
The average item in the produce section
of your supermarket travels some 1,500
miles before arriving at its destination,
either a wholesaler or a supermarkets re-
gional distribution center. These journeys
by truck, train, plane and ship bring more
opportunities for lost food, as items decay
or get damaged en route. In-transit losses
reach 10% to 15% for some crops, with
tomatoes, leafy greens and grapes among
the most fragile.
FOOD WASTE IN PROCESSING
U.S. supermarkets throw away an estimat-
ed 30 million pounds of food every day
damaged goods, expired products, dented
boxes and the like. According to a recent
study by the USDA, in 2006 supermarkets
tossed out, on average, 8% of their fresh
fruit, 8% of their fresh vegetables, 5% of
their fresh meat and poultry and 9% of
their fresh seafood. (Among the most
frequently discarded items were mus-
tard greens, at 61%, papaya, at 51%, and
veal, at 28%.) Some of the unwanted food
gets composted or donated, but most of
it ends up in landfills. Researchers also
estimate that American households waste
15% to 25% of the food that they buy, but
the actual figure may be higher.
Food waste continues in the postharvest
stage, but the amounts of loss involved
are relatively unknown and difficult to
estimate. Regardless, the variety of fac-
tors that contribute to food waste, both
biological/environmental and socio-eco-
nomical, would limit the usefulness and
reliability of general figures. In storage,
considerable quantitative losses can be
attributed to pests and microorganisms.
FOOD WASTE AT THE RETAIL LEVEL
Packaging protects food from damage
during its transportation from farms and
factories via warehouses to retailing, as
well as preserving its freshness upon ar-
rival. Although it avoids considerable food
waste, packaging can compromise efforts
to reduce food waste in other ways, such
as by contaminating waste that could be
used for animal feedstocks.
Retail stores can throw away large quanti-
ties of food. Usually this consists of items
that have reached their sell-by date or
use-by date Most, if not all, of this food is
edible at the time of disposal but stores
often go to great lengths to ensure that
poor or homeless people are unable to
access it. On the other hand some stores
work with charitable organizations to
distribute food they can no longer display
on their shelves. Retailers also contribute
to waste as a result of their contractual
arrangements with suppliers. Failure to
supply agreed quantities renders farmers
or processors liable to have their contracts
cancelled. As a consequence they plan
to produce more than actually required
in order to meet the contract, in order to
have a margin of error. Most of the surplus
production is thrown away.
Commercial kitchens (in hospitals, schools
and restaurants) throw away between 4%
and 10% of the food that they purchase,
for reasons like overproduction, spoil-
age, expiration, trimmings, burned items,
catering leftovers and contamination. Up
to 10% of the items at fast-food restau-
rants are discarded because theyve sat
too long after being prepared. The losses
continue on the plate. A researcher from
the Cornell University Food and Brand Lab
found that diners leave an average of 17%
of their meals uneaten, because of factors
like large serving sizes or unwanted side
dishes. And roughly 55% of major leftovers
arent taken home.
PRIMARY CAUSES OF FOOD LOSS 55
FOOD SCRAPS
REASONS FOR HOUSEHOLD FOOD WASTE
Consumer research identifies a large number of
reasons for households wasting food.
second-largest component of the national waste
stream, making up 19% of what we put into
landfills. (Americans compost only about 2.5%
of the food that they discard.) Food in landfill
creates methane, a source of greenhouse gas.
In addition, 2% of all U.S. energy consumption
goes into producing food that is ultimately JUST
thrown out.
PART OF FOOD NOT EATEN
PLATE SCRAPS
BOUGHT SOMETHING THEY ALREADY HAD
2%
FAMILY DIDNT LIKE
6%
LEFT OUT TOO LONG & CHILDREN REFUSED
14%
FOOD OVERCOOKED & DIDNT LIKE
18%
LEFTOVERS WHEN COOKING
31%
LOOKED OFF
35%
SMELLED OFF
46%
PAST USE BY DATE
48%
52% 55%
NOT ALL WASTE IS PREVENTABLE
Of course, not all food that is lost is suit-
able for consumption. Some losseslike
the condemnation nature of such losses
is much debated. Diseased animals at
the slaughtering house, or the discard of
moldy fruit from the produce shelf at the
supermarketare necessary to ensure
the safety and wholesomeness of the U.S.
food supply. Such foods are not recover-
able for human use.
Likewise, plate scraps are appropriately
discarded at eating establishments out of
health considerations. In addition, not all
food that is lost is economically recover-
able. Food recovery efforts are often lim-
ited by financial and logistical constraints
that make it difficult to match recovered
food with potential recipients.
Nevertheless, large quantities of whole-
some, edible food, are lost at every stage
of the marketing system. Examples of such
losses include meats, bread, and other
foods prepared by a restaurant or caterer
but never served and the discard of blem-
ished or over-ripe produce, which may be
unmarketable for cosmetic reasons, but
are otherwise nutritious and safe.
Even a modest increase in the recovery
of such wholesome foods could reduce
hunger by supplementing existing food-
assistance efforts; provide tax savings to
farmers, supermarkets, and foodservice
establishments that donate food; and
lessen the environmental impacts of waste
disposal. Understanding where and how
much food is lost is an important step in
reducing waste and increasing the ef-
ficiencyof food recovery efforts.
USDAs Economic Research Service
(ERS) recently undertook a review of
the current data on foodwaste and built
on this knowledge to generate new
estimates of food loss by food retail-
ers (supermarkets,convenience stores,
and other retail outlets), and consumers
and foodservice establishments (stor-
age, preparation, and plate waste in some
households and foodservice places.
According to the new ERS estimates,
about 96 billion pounds of food, or 27
percent of the 356 billion pounds of the
edible food available for human consump-
tion in the United States, were lost to hu-
man use at these three marketing stages
in 1995. Fresh fruits and vegetables,
fluid milk, grain products, and sweeten-
ers (mostly sugar and high fructose corn
syrup) accounted some of these losses.
ERS does not know the share of these
losses that are recoverable. However, we
can get an idea of the significance of loss
by calculating the potential benefit of
recovery. On average, each American con-
sumes about 3 pounds of food each day.
If even 5 percent of the 96 billion pounds
were recovered, that quantity would
represent the equivalent of a days food
for each of 4 million people. Recovery
rates of 10 percent and 25 percent would
provide enough food for the equivalent of
8 million and 20 million people.
FOOD OVERLOAD HISTORY & EFFECTS OF THE FOOD WASTE EPIDEMIC58
The loss estimates presented here are
tentative and are intended to serve as
a starting point for additional research.
Many of the studies on which these
estimates are based on dates from the
mid1970s or before.
Dramatic changes have occurred in the
food marketing system since then, includ-
ing innovations in food processing tech-
nology and unprecedented growth in the
foodservice sector. While we made crude
adjustments for these changes in our
analysis, additional researchespecially
updated data on foodservice, processing,
and household food lossesis needed
to add precision to these estimates and to
provide a more complete picture of food
loss across the entire marketing system.
Research into the food industry of the
U.S., whose food supply is the most
diverse and abundant of any country in
the world, found food waste occurring at
the beginning of food production. From
planting, crops can be subjected to pest
infestations and severe weather, which
cause losses before harvest. Since natural
forces (e.g. temperature and precipita-
tion) remain the primary drivers of crop
growth, losses from these can be experi-
enced by all forms of agriculture.
96BILLION POUNDS OF EDIBLE FOOD ARE CONSIDEREDRECOVERABLE
PRIMARY CAUSES OF FOOD LOSS 59
NOT ALL FOOD WASTE IS AVOIDABLE
Of course, not all food that is lost is suitable for
consumption. Some losseslike the condem-
nation nature of such losses is much debated.
Diseased animals at the slaughtering house, or
the discard of moldy fruit from the produce shelf
at the supermarket are necessary to ensure the
safety of the U.S. food supply.
WASTE REDUCTION
CHAPTER 4 MAIN STRATEGIES OF
Specific criteria must be established in order to decide which possible alternative offers
the most successful solution. First, the solution must be effective. It must be easy to im-
plement and receive action by the largest amount of the population as a small response
would not give the desired results. Secondly, the solution must be feasible. It must have
the capacity to be initiated through regulations and laws, and still maintain reasonable
requirements. There are currently no incentives or regulatory laws that require residen-
tial or commercial disposal of food scraps in an efficient manner. This would be neces-
sary to ensure cooperation from the entire community. And lastly, the solution must be
affordable and, essentially, profitable. As the economy is constantly fluctuating, it would
be ideal if the solution could provide some type of payback into the system itself. The
best solution will go far beyond simply reducing the amount of food waste.
CONSUMER FOOD WASTE REDUCTION
The first solution targets the heart of
American consumerismthe household.
This method would attempt to make citi-
zens aware of the large quantity of food
that is wasted and educate each citizen
on beneficial ways to reduce, reuse, and
recycle. At its basis, this solution would
consist of properly storing food, not
buying bulk, better preparing meals, or
creating personal compost bins. Ideally,
the aim is for each citizen to consider all
the possibilities of what can be done with
food before tossing it in the trashcan or
using excess water and energy to grind it
through the disposal.
Whilst clearly a lot can be done to reduce
household food waste, it is important
to note that food waste coming from
food preparation in the home is often an
inevitable part of home cooking. Whilst
households might reduce their inedible
food waste (peelings etc) by purchasing
readily prepared meals, this would have an
impact up-stream by increasing produc-
tion of peelings etc in the supply chain.
There are a number of reasons for the
high percentage going to landfill: domes-
tic composting food waste is complicated
by the safety issues around meat based
foods, and recycling is not an option. So
households tend to see disposal in black
bins as being the default for many types
of food waste.
The environmental impact of food waste
disposed of in landfill is large. As food de-
cays it can produce methane (a significant
greenhouse gas). In addition the energy
used in production, processing, trans-
portation etc of most foods is significant
this is now often thought of in carbon
equivalent terms.
Though it may be the cheapest to execute,
the majority of consumers simply dont
realize how much food they actually
waste. This solution is considerably cheap
and affordable as it relies on the con-
scious consumer to make smarter choices;
however, it is not exactly feasible to enact
a law that instructs citizens not to buy
bulk groceries, cook too much food, or
require households to compost their
own waste. Even though the campaigns,
such as Reduce, Reuse, Recycle, which
surround this solution have reaped some
successful results, the need arises for food
waste reduction to take a bigger turn.
Although reducing food waste through
awareness is affordable, attacking this
growing problem solely at the consumer
level is clearly not the most effective or
only reasonable solution.
It was typical during the years of the depression
for families to have a food study chart in each
home showing what a typical portion size should
be. Here a mother measures her slice of bread to
verify the correct amount.
FOOD RECOVERY AND GLEANING
The second proposed solution is food
recovery and gleaning which also fails to
completely meet the specified criteria for
success. Again, this method entails the
collection of wholesome food for the dis-
tribution to the poor and hungry. This is
achieved through four main efforts. Field
gleaning is collection from fields that have
already been mechanically harvested or
where it is not economically profitable to
harvest. Perishable food rescue is recover-
ing food from wholesale or retail sources
such as groceries stores. Food rescue is
the recovery of prepared foods from the
food industry such as cafeterias or res-
taurants. Nonperishable food collection is
the recovery of food with long-shelf lives
such as canned goods (USDA, EPA).
While this solution is cost effective, it is
not fully effective or feasible. According
to the USDA, donations to food recovery
organizations were down by an astonish-
ing 9% last year and 20% of the requests
for emergency food assistance in the U.S.
were not met.
This solution cannot be completely effec-
tive as it lacks the ability to receive action
by a large majority of the population even
though it is extremely easy to utilize. In
Birmingham, Magic City Harvest is a non-
profit organization that collects prepared
and perishable food. While it has had
major impact in the greater Birmingham
area, this organization constantly sends
out flyers and letters begging for dona-
tions (The Harvester). Also, this method
does not take into account all kinds of
food waste such as the scraps that arent
suitable for consumption. This solu-
tion also fails to be completely feasible
as it is not practical for our government
to enact laws that require citizens or
companies to donate left-over or surplus
food. Many regulations must be put into
place concerning what can be deemed as
edible,and a system must be developed
that closely monitors this process (EPA).
This solution is, however, affordable as it
would not cost the consumer to take this
action. Eliminating hunger is certainly
a moral issue and for those who lack a
compassion for this cause, the problem
arises of motivating the population to
take the desired action, thus, failing once
again to be fully effective. Food recovery
and gleaning have the potential to be a
successful solution; however, as the only
method that is exploited, it lacks the abil-
ity to be fully effective and feasible.
FOOD OVERLOAD HISTORY & EFFECTS OF THE FOOD WASTE EPIDEMIC66
GLEANINGIS THE ACT OF COLLECTING LEFT OVER CROPS FROM FARMERS FIELDS AFTER A COMMERCIAL HARVEST
FOOD RECYCLING
The third proposed solution is food recy-
cling or, basically, large-scale composting.
This solution is effective as well as feasible
but fails to be completely affordable. This
is easy to implement as consumers would
simply have designated bins to place ex-
cess food waste which would be picked up
just as normal trash. The job market could
be expanded for garbage disposal com-
panies. Production facilities would need
to be built that would turn the waste into
renewable energy. This would be a costly
process to initiate; buying garbage bins,
urging consumers to purchase bio-de-
gradable bags, educating the community
on how to properly dispose of their waste,
and building production plants. However,
this solution would be profitable. Entire
communities could be powered by their
own food waste. These facilities could
compost food waste to sell which would
be a safe, organic fertilizer that is free of
pathogens (EPA, Wie).
FOOD RECOVERY AND HIERARCHY
The final and best solution to reducing
he amount of food waste is the implemen-
tation of the food waste recovery hierar-
chy. The food waste hierarchy is effective
in that it includes all levels of food waste,
from the consumer to the manufacturer.
This can indirectly lower the purchasing
costs as consumers would buy only what
is needed. Disposal fees would decrease
as food banks offer free pick-ups for
donations, and composting fees are often
less than landfill fees. Sewage and elec-
tricity are decreased (Citizens Guide). The
hierarchy is feasible as certain regulations
can be implemented concerning disposal
methods and industrial procedures. Tax
deductions can be givento food organiza-
tions. The solution is also affordable and
contains the potential for revenue. Just as
the previous solutions, it does not incur
cost to take these actions, besides indus-
trially composting food for electricity and
heat. Utilizing the costly solution at the
end of the chain, this provides the largest
potential for food waste to be diverted in
more affordable manners. However, this
compost can be sold from the farmers and
back to consumers or other businesses,
thus, further harnessing the profitability
(Putting Surplus,Wie). The food recovery
hierarchy prioritizes methods of reduc-
tion in order to divert the largest possible
amount of food away from landfills in
every of the most effective, feasible, and
cost effective way.
FOOD OVERLOAD HISTORY & EFFECTS OF THE FOOD WASTE EPIDEMIC68
STRATEGIES OF WASTE REDUCTION 69
356BILLION POUNDS OF EDIBLE FOOD AVAILABLE FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION IN THE UNITED STATES, WAS LOST SIMPLY BY HUMAN WASTEFULNESS
Advances in refrigiration, preparation, on both the
consumer and manufacturer if regulated could
help to drastically alter the food waste epidemic.
THE FOOD WASTE HIERARCHYINCLUDES ALL LEVELS OF FOOD WASTE CONSUMERTO MANUFACTURER.
WASTE
CHAPTER 5 TIPS FOR AVOIDING
In addition to the economic and ethical ramifications, our widespread squandering has
far-reaching environmental impact. Since each person creates roughly a half-pound of
food waste per day, we can play a significant role in reducing it. We have compiled this
chapter to ensure that you have some available ideas at your discretion to implement in
your household today.
FOOD
MARKING CHANGES THAT MATTER
Use it up, wear it out, make do, or do
without is a favorite adage in both frugal
and green circles, and it is something I
strive to live by. One of the best ways to
use it up is to think differently about our
food and ways to avoid wasting it. Lloyd
wrote a great post a while back about the
statistics for how much food we waste in
the U.S., and the numbers are, frankly, ap-
palling. On average, we waste 14% of our
food purchases per year, and the average
American family throws out over $600 of
fruit per year. Most of the food we waste
is due to spoilage; were buying too much
and using too little of it.
Weve all had it happen: half the loaf of
bread goes stale because no one wants
to eat sandwiches today, and the grapes
we bought as healthy snacks for the kids
lunches languish in the crisper. With a
little creativity, and an eye toward van-
quishing waste in our lives, we can make
use of more of our food before it goes to
waste. Here are a few ideas for you.
Of course, some food waste is unavoid-
able, especially if you have picky eaters in
your family. Sometimes you just cant get
a child to eat something you thought he
or she would enjoy. But many other forms
of food waste can be handled better.
Start off with how you handle your gro-
cery shopping. Think not only about how
much youre buying, but how soon it will
go bad. Being realistic about what you and
your family will consume in a reasonable
period will cut back on what you waste.
Food storage can make a big difference.
Some fruits can stay out for weeks and not
have a problem. Others go bad in days,
even in the refrigerator. The same goes for
all vegetables.
Meats, of course, need refrigeration, but
they can also freeze quite nicely. If you
separate your meat out into the quantities
you will need for cooking later, you can
buy meat in bulk, and freeze only the ad-
ditional excess.
Those sell by and use by dates can make
a big difference in how much food goes
bad in your home. If youre going to use
it up right away, you dont have too much
to worry about close expiration dates, but
if you know it will take a while for you to
use the entire package, watch that date
closely and get the best one possible.
You should also learn to save and use your
leftovers better. If you have a lot of left-
overs, they may freeze well. Then again,
they could be tomorrows lunch.
You can also think about how much you
eat. Eaten food isnt wasted, as such, but
it can go straight to your waist when you
dont want it to. Think about how much
youre eating. If you realize youre eating
too much, try cutting back.
Remember that much of your food waste
does not need to go into the trash. Much
of it can be composted instead. Citrus and
onions dont go in the compost so well,
especially if you use worms, but other
food remnants will do quite well. Then
you have great fertilizer for your yard and
the garden.
FOOD OVERLOAD HISTORY & EFFECTS OF THE FOOD WASTE EPIDEMIC74
Eating a small quantity of food was once forced
upon Americans by the government. The im-
age depicts a typical weekly ration of food for
one person. Compare this to what you eat on a
weekly basis and see the drastic changes that
have occurred.
FOOD OVERLOAD HISTORY & EFFECTS OF THE FOOD WASTE EPIDEMIC76
MANAGING FOOD WASTE HIERARCHY
The following graph summarises consumer
research results into consumers suggestions for
managing household food waste.
Whilst clearly a lot can be done to reduce house-
hold food waste, it is important to note that food
waste coming from food preparation in the home
is often an inevitable part of home cooking.
Whilst households might reduce their inedible
food waste (peelings etc) by purchasing readily
prepared meals, this would have an impact up-
stream by increasing production of peelings etc
in the supply chain.
REDUCE IT RE-USE IT+ BETTER PLANNING + IMPROVED STORAGE + INVENTIVE RECIPES + DONATIONS
SHOP SMARTLY
Plan a weeks worth of dinners and make a
detailed shopping list to prevent overbuy-
ing. Leave a few nights free for leftovers
or changing plans. Stick to your list and be
honest with yourselfdont buy produce
that often goes unused. (Click here for
Audubons handy label guide, an indispen-
sible source of info to help you decipher
the environmental claims plastered on
food products lining grocery store aisles.
AVOID PORTION DISTORTION
Dont dish out too much. Its easy to take
seconds, but we dont often save whats
left on the plate. And beware todays
massive plates make a reasonable amount
look tiny. If youre out to eat, know that
youll likely get more food than you need
or want. If leftovers leave you cold, halve
your recipes and order differently at the
restaurants you go to.
LOVE YOUR LEFTOVERS
Eat your leftovers. Its easy to keep the re-
mains of your dinner, but thats no help if
you dont eat them. Theyre ideal lunches,
and theyll save you time and money.
EXPIRATION EXASPERATION
Trust your senses before you rely on the
package date. Sell-by dates are aimed at
retailers and leave about a week to enjoy
an item at home. And best-by is less strin-
gent than use-by.
TIPS FOR AVOIDING FOOD WASTE 77
RECYCLE+ COMPOSTING + SEGREGATED FOOD WASTE
DONT DISH OUTTOO MUCH TODAYS MASSIVE SERVINGS MAKE YESTERDAYS PORTIONS LOOK TINY.
CHANGESTARTI NG TODAY
CHAPTER 6 PROMOTING THE
Successful food recovery programs can provide many benefits to society which can
offset a portion of these costs. Among other things, food recovery programs can help to
reduce hunger; provide tax savings to farmers, food manufacturers, retailers, foodser-
vice operators, and others that donate food; conserve landfill space; and lessen the
costs and environmental impact of solid waste disposal. And in all this is a benefit to all
of us that live in this country.
FOOD RECOVERY EFFORTS REACH
ACROSS MARKETING SYSTEMS
A Citizens Guide to Food RecoveryUSDA
has recently published A Citizens Guide
to Food Recovery, a resource guide on
food recovery programs for businesses,
community-based organizations, private
citizens, and local governments. The
Guide is designed to support food recov-
ery by showing communities, individuals,
and businesses how to support existing
food recovery efforts or to begin new
programs in their communities.
In addition to creating the Citizens Guide
USDA has taken a wide variety of steps to
promote citizen service related to all food
recovery and gleaning:
Food Recovery Roundtables
Secretary of Agriculture Dan Glickman has
convened round tables around the coun-
try to bring together interested nonprofit
groups, corporate leaders, social service
agencies, and Government officials for a
collaborative action on food recovery.
AmeriCorps Summer of Gleaning
In the Summer of 1996, as one part of its
AmeriCorps program, USDA sponsored a
special AmeriCorps Summer of Gleaning
program that implemented 22 food recov-
ery projects in 20 States. The program was
based on the so-called volunteer genera-
tor model, in which a handful of com-
pensated Ameri-Corps members recruit
volunteers to help implement large-scale
tasks. The 88 AmeriCorps members in the
summer program recruited over 1,600
volunteers who helped pick, sort, deliver,
and prepare recovered foods.
USDA National Hunger Clearinghouse
USDA has contracted with World Hunger
Year, a national nonprofit organization,
to develop the USDA National Hunger
Clearinghouse. The Clearinghouse es-
tablished a communications network and
comprehensive database identifying all
known organizations providing hunger-
and poverty-related services, particularly
organizations supporting food recovery
efforts.
Food Safety Training for FoodRecovery
USDAs Cooperative State Research, Edu-
cation and Extension Service (CSREES),
in conjunction with the Cooperative
Extension System, is helping local hunger
groups recover food safely. Nationwide
outreach programs like Purdue Uni-
versitys Safe Food for the Hungry and
S.T.R.E.T.C.H. (Safety, Training, Resources,
and Education to Combat Hunger) teach
food-assistance workers how to transport,
store, and prepare food safely. They also
show groups dedicated to feeding the
hungry how to create nutritious meals
from the most commonly donated food-
stuffs and bulk supplies. USDAs Food
Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is
working with the Chef and Child Foun-
dation, the philanthropic arm of the
American Culinary Federation, to expand
food-safety training for people serving
food to the needy at nonprofit feeding
program sites, including soup kitchens
and shelters.
One of the biggest and most significant changes
can be made easily by be more aware of your
purchases at the marketplace.
FOOD OVERLOAD HISTORY & EFFECTS OF THE FOOD WASTE EPIDEMIC82
National Collaboration of Youth (NCY)
An umbrella group for such youth orga-
nizations as the Boy and Girl Scouts, Big
Brothers/ Big Sisters, YMCA of America,
and the Boys and Girls Clubs. The agree-
ment specifies how the over 40 million
members of NCY organizations will be
encouraged to volunteer to recover food.
Federal Cafeterias and Farmers Markets
In conjunction with USDA efforts, the
Washington cafeterias of the Department
of Justice, the Department of Energy, and
the Office of Personnel Management are
donating excess food to the DC Central
Kitchen in Washington, DC. The DC Cen-
tral Kitchen plans and distributes 3,000
meals per day, 7 days a week, to 95 charity
outlets across the Washington metropoli-
tan area. The Kitchen is in part staffed by
homeless workers 48 per year who also
receive 3 months of on-the-job training in
food preparation and management from
professional chefs who volunteer some of
operating skills.
USDA is also helping school districts in
both the Washington, DC, and Wichita,
KS, areas to involve students in commu-
nity service activities related to fighting
hunger and recovering food.
Public Service Announcements
USDA worked with the Fox Television
Network to air a plot-related public ser-
vice announcements
National Summit on Food Recovery
USDA, the Congressional Hunger Center,
and the nonprofit groups Second Harvest
and FoodChain will co-sponsor a National
Summit on Food Recovery, which will be
modeled on President Clintons Sum-
mit on Americas Future. The Summit will
bring together leaders from State, county,
and city governments, Indian tribes,
nonprofit organizations, religious groups,
large corporations, and small businesses.
All attendees will be asked to make specif-
ic commitments to increase food recovery
prior to the event.
FoodChain
FoodChain is the Nations largest net-
work of prepared and perishable food
rescue programs. It opened its doors in
the year of 1992 with a staff of only one
person. Today, 116 member programs
and 22 associate programs participate in
FoodChain, distributing nearly 100 mil-
lion pounds of food to some 7,000 social
service agencies each year.
FOOD OVERLOAD HISTORY & EFFECTS OF THE FOOD WASTE EPIDEMIC84
Foodservice
Hundreds of nationwide and regional res-
taurant chains of various sizes, along with
individual foodservice outlets, are chan-
neling unsold food to local food recovery
programs.
Second Harvest
The largest domestic hunger relief orga-
nization, rescued 811.3 million pounds
of food in 1995 from going to waste by
soliciting donations of food and grocery
products from the Nations food industry.
Society of Saint Andrew (SoSA)
The SoSA Gleaning Network has recovered
more than 200 million pounds of fresh
fruits and vegetables since its founding in
1979, and distributed them to food pan-
tries and soup kitchens across the U.S.
Unsaleable Food Products
The food industry has developed a Joint
Industry Task Force on Unsaleables to
develop new strategies and incentives to
improve the condition of dented, bruised,
or otherwise damaged food products for
food banks. These unsaleables are chan-
neled through Product Reclamation Cen-
ters, which help retailers recover the food
for organizations that assist the needy.
These education programs that help
consumers change their food discard be-
havior may also be effective in preventing
food loss. For instance, educational pro-
grams that help meal planners determine
appropriate portion sizes and distinguish
between spoiled and safe food can help
consumers reduce plate waste and better
utilize leftovers. Improved meal planning
and purchasing skillsincluding informa-
tion that helps consumers understand
the meaning of manufacturers expiration
codes,and use-by and sell-by dates can
reduce the discard of food items.
Over the long run, the reduction and
recovery of uneaten food in the United
States is a complex undertaking requir-
ing the involvement of public and private
institutions, as well as consumers. Efforts
to reduce or prevent food loss must be
balanced against the cost of conserving
and recovering food.
PROMOTING THE CHANGE 85
FOOD DOLLARS IN THE UNITED STATES
The average allocation of every dollar spent on
food in the US. Thet tiny amount on the left ends
up in the hands of farmers and the rest of it goes
towards marketing.
84.2 MARKETING15.8 FARM
ONE U.S. DOLLAR
THE MARKETING AND FARMING DOLLAR
The USDA Economic Research Service
recently published a report that helps
shed the light on the cost of food. Take a
look at the interesting statistic above. For
every dollar we spend on food, less than
16 cents go to farmers. The rest is spent
on marketing.
This shouldnt surprise you. Authors get
pennies for every dollar spent on their
books. The bulk goes to the bookstores
(50%) and to publishers (2540%). And
in the music industry, numbers are similar.
The working man / woman creating the
actual goods is far from the end con-
sumer. Every stop along the supply chain
needs to make a living too.
But here is the good news for all the food-
ies out there who complain about the high
cost of organic grass fed beef or fresh
produce find a local farm and buy directly
from the source. between you and the
farmer theres 84 cents to split. Thats a
bargain for both sides.
FOOD OVERLOAD HISTORY & EFFECTS OF THE FOOD WASTE EPIDEMIC86
FARMERS MARKETS
The USDA Economic Research Service
recently published a report that helps
shed the light on the cost of food. Take a
look at the interesting statistic above. For
every dollar we spend on food, less than
16 cents go to farmers. The rest is spent
on marketing.
This shouldnt surprise you. Authors get
pennies for every dollar spent on their
books. The bulk goes to the bookstores
(50%) and to publishers (25%40%). And
in the music industry, numbers are similar.
The working man / woman creating the
actual goods is far from the end con-
sumer. Every stop along the supply chain
needs to make a living too.
But here is the good news for all the food-
ies out there who complain about the high
cost of organic grass fed beef or fresh
produce find a local farm and buy directly
from the source. between you and the
farmer theres 84 cents to split. Thats a
bargain for both sides.
FOOD WASTE IS THE MOST OVERLOOKED ACT, THAT WE ALL PARTAKE IN.
It has such a massive impact on so many
aspects of our lives. There are so many is-
sues that come from wasting food includ-
ing the environment, sociological issues
or simply hitting our wallets. Its some-
thing that we cant continue to ignore and
have to change our ways if we want to live
more sustainably.
FOOD WASTE
GLOSSARYA
Agricultural Waste
Poultry and livestock manure, and residual
materials in liquid or solid form generated
from the production and marketing of
poultry, livestock or fur-bearing animals;
also includes grain, vegetable, and fruit
harvest residue.
Air Pollution
The presence in the outdoor atmosphere
of one or more air pollutants or any com-
bination thereof.
B
Bacteria
Microscopic living organisms that can
aid in pollution control by metabolizing
organic matter in sewage, oil spills or
other pollutants. However, bacteria in soil,
water or air can also cause human, animal
and plant health problems.
Biodegradable
Capable of decomposing under natural
physical conditions.
C
Commercial Waste
All solid waste emanating from business
or commercial establishments.
Compost
A humus or soil-like material created from
aerobic, microbial decomposition of or-
ganic materials such as food scraps, yard
trimmings, and manure.
Composting
A process of accelerated biological
decomposition of organic material under
controlled conditions.
D
Decomposition
The breakdown of matter by bacteria and
fungi, changing the chemical makeup and
physical appearance of materials.
Digestion
The biochemical decomposition of or-
ganic matter, resulting in partial gasifica-
tion, liquefaction, and mineralization of
pollutants.
Dump
A site used to dispose of solid waste with-
out environmental controls.
GLOSSARY 91
EEnd User
Consumer of products for the purpose of
recycling. Excludes products for re-use or
combustion for energy recovery.
F
Fill
Man-made deposits of natural soils or
rock products and waste materials.
Food Chain
A sequence of organisms, each of which
uses the next, lower member of the se-
quence as a food source.
Food Processing Waste
Food residues produced during agricul-
tural and industrial operations.
Food Waste
Uneaten food and food preparation
wastes from residences and commercial
establishments such as grocery stores,
restaurants, and produce stands, institu-
tional cafeterias and kitchens, and indus-
trial sources like employee lunchrooms.
G
Garbage
Animal and vegetable waste resulting from
the handling, storage, sale, preparation,
cooking, and serving of foods.
L
Landfills
Sanitary landfills are disposal sites for
non-hazardous solid wastes spread in lay-
ers, compacted to the smallest practical
volume, and covered by material applied
at the end of each operating day.
M
Marketing
The return of recyclables to productive
use. Marketing may involve the sale of
materials, or be a transaction without pay.
In some instances, marketing may involve
payment to a user.
Markets
The businesses who accept the recyclable
materials for reuse or processing, either
for their own consumption or for resale. A
public agency may also be a market.
O
Organic
1. Referring to or derived from living
organisms. 2. In chemistry, any compound
containing carbon.
P
Plate Waste
A small scrap or leaving of food after a
meal is completed.
FOOD OVERLOAD HISTORY & EFFECTS OF THE FOOD WASTE EPIDEMIC92
RRecyclable
Products that can be collected and
remanufactured into new products after
theyve been used. These products do not
necessarily contain recycled materials and
only benefit the environment if people
recycle them after use.
Recycle
Minimizing waste generation by recover-
ing and reprocessing usable products that
might otherwise become waste
Refuse
Unwanted or discarded solid, liquid, semi-
solid or contained gaseous material.
Region
Two or more municipalities which have
joined together by creating a district or
signing an interlocal agreement or signing
a mutual contract for a definite period of
time concerning solid waste management
within such municipalities.
Residual
Amount of a pollutant remaining within
the environment.
Reuse
Using a product or component of munici-
pal solid waste in its original form more
than once.
S
Salvage
The utilization of waste materials.
Scrap
Materials discarded that may be suitable
for reprocessing
Solid Waste
(see refuse)
Sustainability
Meeting the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future gen-
erations to meet their own needs.
T
Trash
Material considered worthless or offensive
that is thrown away. Generally defined as
dry waste material
W
Waste
1. Unwanted materials left over from a
manufacturing process. 2. Refuse from
places of human or animal habitation.
Waste Generation
The amount of waste generated by a given
source or category of sources.
Z
Zero Waste
A goal that is both pragmatic and vision-
ary, to guide people to emulate sustain-
able natural cycles, where all discarded
materials are resources for others to use.
93GLOSSARY
COLOPHON 2 COPIES
PRINTED ON
CANSON 70LB PAPER FOR INSIDE PAGES AND
CANSON 100LB PAPER FOR COVER.
BOOKS WERE PRINTED ON HP B8550 PRINTER
IN MAY 2011
THE TITLES OF THE BOOK WERE COMPOSED IN
MISO TYPEFACE BY ADVENT ANDREAS K
THE BODY COPY WERE COMPOSED IN
MUSEO SANS & ITALIC BY JOS BUIVENGA
FOOD OVERLOAD HISTORY & EFFECTS OF THE FOOD WASTE EPIDEMIC
If youve wondered why Americans are
fatter than the average country, you may
find the fact that we have the highest
rate of food waste out of any of the other
developed countries in the world.
This book explores the history, as well as
the whys into this epidemic.Also, included
are ideas on how you can reduce your
overall food waste and begin becoming
part of the solution and stop being part of
the problem.
FOOD OVERLOAD HIST
OR
Y &
EFFE
CT
S OF T
HE
FOO
D W
AST
E E
PID
EM
IC D
ESIG
NE
D A
ND
CO
MP
ILED
BY
BIA
NC
A FR
AN
K