Tough question, but Tesco in the UK plans to give almost $10 million to Oxford to figure it out so they can include such data on food labels. Wow. As I read through the UK news sites I find it striking how much more discussion there is related to interesting news like this compared to US media outlets who simply provide pieces here and there. With the US leaving the largest carbon footprint, isn't it time our own media makes this a higher priority?
In principle, the concept is easy. A so-called "life-cycle analysis" tots up the energy used to extract raw materials and turn them into products. The greater the energy use, the greater the carbon footprint, and the worse for the environment a product is. Tesco says such information would allow consumers to shop according to their environmental conscience. As demand for more damaging products falls, the thinking goes, so will the stocking of that product. The supermarket is not alone in coveting carbon labels: Duchy Originals, the food company set up by Prince Charles, is among those investigating similar schemes.Could you even imagine Walmart funding such a program? Me neither.
The problems start in deciding exactly what emissions should be counted. Direct carbon use is easy to measure, but indirect emissions are far more difficult. Should supermarkets include the electricity used to refrigerate products in their stores? What about the fuel in the tractors on a farm thousands of miles away? And if you think the answer is obvious, what about the fuel in the cars the farmworkers drive to get to work? "Boundaries are hugely difficult and, of course, the boundaries may not be in this country," says Dr Boardman. Some experts even argue the audited supply chain should extend as far as the ultimate source of energy - the sun.
