Climate alarmists are now attacking…..sandwiches

From the UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER and the “I’m going to have a sandwich for lunch, just for spite” department comes this exercise in climate stupidity equating sandwich types to miles driven in a car. So for extra spite, I’m going to drive my car to the nearest Subway sandwich shop today and order a foot-long, with double meat. Like this one.

For the rest of you that embrace this guilt building exercise, have a Tofu on Rye.

When will they learn you can’t motivate people by trying to make them feel guilty about everyday foods? I do predict though, at some point, just like they require for cars, California will require foods top have a “global warming impact” sticker in the not too distant future as a way of taxing those “carbon footprints”.

Is your sandwich bad for the environment?

Do you take a packed lunch to work or buy a sandwich from the shop? The carbon footprint of your sandwich could be having a major impact on greenhouse gas emissions according to new research.

Researchers at The University of Manchester have carried out the first ever study looking at the carbon footprint of sandwiches, both home-made and pre-packaged. They considered the whole life cycle of sandwiches, including the production of ingredients, sandwiches and their packaging, as well as food waste discarded at home and elsewhere in the supply chain.

Altogether the team looked at 40 different sandwich types, recipes and combinations. They found the highest carbon footprints for the sandwiches with pork meat (bacon, ham or sausages) and those containing cheese or prawns.

Of the recipes considered, the most carbon-intensive variety is a ready-made ‘all-day breakfast’ sandwich which includes egg, bacon and sausage.

The researchers estimate that this type of sandwich generates 1441 grams of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2 eq.). This is equivalent to CO2 emissions from driving a car for 12 miles.

The sandwich with the lowest carbon emission equivalent is a simple home-made favourite, ham and cheese. The study also found that making your own sandwiches at home could reduce carbon emissions by a half compared to ready-made equivalents.

According to the British Sandwich Association (BSA) more than 11.5 billion sandwiches are consumed each year in the UK alone. Around half of those are made at home and the other half are bought over the counter in shops, supermarkets and service stations around the country. That means the UK spends nearly £8 billion a year on the breaded snack, at an average cost of £2 per snack.

Professor Adisa Azapagic, from the School of Chemical Engineering and Analytical Sciences, said:

‘Given that sandwiches are a staple of the British diet as well as their significant market share in the food sector, it is important to understand the contribution from this sector to the emissions of greenhouse gases.

‘For example, consuming 11.5 billion sandwiches annually in the UK generates, on average, 9.5 million tonnes of CO2 eq., equivalent to the annual use of 8.6 million cars.’

The results show the largest contributor to a sandwich’s carbon footprint is the agricultural production and processing of their ingredients. Depending on the type, this can account for around 37%-67% of CO2 eq. for ready-made sandwiches.

Keeping sandwiches chilled in supermarkets and shops also contributes to their carbon footprint. This can account for up to a quarter of their greenhouse gas emission equivalent. Then there is the packaging material which comes in at up to 8.5 % and, finally, transporting materials and refrigerating sandwiches themselves adds a further 4%.

The study concludes that the carbon footprint of the snacks could be reduced by as much as 50 per cent if a combination of changes were made to the recipes, packaging and waste disposal. The researchers also suggest extending sell-by and use-by dates to reduce waste.

Professor Azapagic, who also heads up the Sustainable Industrial Systems research group, added: ‘We need to change the labelling of food to increase the use-by date as these are usually quite conservative. Commercial sandwiches undergo rigorous shelf-life testing and are normally safe for consumption beyond the use-by date stated on the label.’

The BSA also estimate that extending the shelf life of sandwiches by relaxing such dates would help save at least 2000 tonnes of sandwich waste annually.

The study also recommends reducing or omitting certain ingredients that have a higher carbon footprint, like lettuce, tomato, cheese and meat. Reducing ingredients, such as cheese and meat, would also reduce the amount of calories eaten, contributing towards healthier lifestyles.

###

Reference: The paper, Understanding the impact on climate change of convenience food: Carbon footprint of sandwiches by Namy Espinoza-Orias, Adisa Azapagic; Sustainable Industrial Systems, School of Chemical Engineering and Analytical Sciences, The University of Manchester was published in the Journal of Sustainable Production and Consumption https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2017.12.002

Advertisements

231 thoughts on “Climate alarmists are now attacking…..sandwiches

    • How much CO2 was generated in gathering all the information for this study, meetings, travel, calculations, publication, etc., a study which will have zero impact on sandwich making and consumption? Whatever it was, the net effect is an increase in CO2 emissions. Please stop doing these kinds of studies. Go back and play with your models. Don’t try to worry me about what might happen 100 years hence. I’m busy worrying about what might happen 100 minutes hence.

      • Bloviating and awfulizing are heavy emitters of CO2, driving us ever closer to doomsday. Better slap strict controls on lip-flapping.

      • So. The Warmists are capable of breaking down a detailed climate-cost for a ham sandwich … but cannot do the same calculation for a shiny new Tesla? Or average wind tower made from cheap Chinese steel? Or solar farm supplied by cheaply dumped Chinese solar panels ?
        Ham sandwiches … yep. EXACTLY the mentality of the GLOBALIST warmists.

      • Kenji, climate alarmists cannot break down the cost of a ham sandwich anymore accuracy than they can climate change.
        Nobody is going to even bother to check their asinine analyses.
        Utter waste of resources to conduct this study.

      • “The study also recommends reducing or omitting certain ingredients that have a higher carbon footprint, like lettuce, tomato, cheese and meat. ”
        FFS, what is left to go into a sandwich? They have discovered that if you put nothing in a sandwich it has a smaller “carbon footprint”. WOW, Nobel peace prize is waiting.

        Next they suggest removing the butter and half the bread. That would drastically improve things. Then they suggest starving to death, which is what they are really trying to get us to do.

    • Hmm. Climate Nihilism: Everything in life must be rejected because it all causes global warming. When these extremes are reached, you know the end of the meme is near.

      • Just stop eating, because eating supports life, and life is bad. That goes for everything, even busy bees. They give off CO2, too. Bees should be ashamed of themselves. They already wear the hair shirt (all that fuzz) but they don’t self-flaggelate enough.
        The beatings will continue until morale improves.

    • Of the recipes considered, the most carbon-intensive variety is a ready-made ‘all-day breakfast’ sandwich which includes egg, bacon and sausage.
      The researchers estimate that this type of sandwich generates 1441 grams of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2 eq.). This is equivalent to CO2 emissions from driving a car for 12 miles.

      In this case the 1/4 pound breakfast sandwhich (1/8 Kilo) 125 grams produces 11 times the ammount of CO2 than the sandwhich weighs?
      Next time I’m getting the 2fer

      The study also recommends reducing or omitting certain ingredients that have a higher carbon footprint, like lettuce, tomato, cheese and meat. Reducing ingredients, such as cheese and meat, would also reduce the amount of calories eaten, contributing towards healthier lifestyles.

      So basically a sandwhich should be Bread and Mayo

      • Only if the bread was baked at home from ingredients you harvested yourself, ground yourself and baked yourself using wood cut from trees growing outside your back door. Chicken Little anyone?
        I always said the sky is falling to these guys.

      • well at least these noble researchers can sleep well at night knowing that they done their bit to destroy capitalism and save the planet.
        Good work guys, we need more like you !
        /sarc

      • Dry bread? Drying bread takes energy. So does baking.
        How about wheat sprouts instead?

      • Try telling our prisoners that their diet has to change because of carbon restrictions. There will be prison riots all over the land.

    • They need to give everybody breath-rate monitors so everybody can constantly remember to moderate their breathing rate, thus decreasing CO2 emissions. Keeping out oxygen levels down will decrease our metabolic rate and save the planet. Passing out from low oxygen is even a plus as while passed out one does not generate much CO2.

    • Did I misread this? Did they just say that the least carbon intensive sandwich was a home made ham and cheese sandwich and then turn around and say ham was the most carbon intensive meat, and that meat and cheese should be eliminated to lower carbon intensiveness? Is there some sort of logic here that I missed?

      • I read it the same way as you, Tom O.
        But The First law of global warming alarmism states that your arguments don’t need to be self consistent.
        The Second law of global warming alarmism states that your arguments don’t need to be consistent with other global warming alarmists.
        Consistent with the Second law, The Third law of global warming alarmism states that blaming something new on global warming makes it more likely to be published (this way all possible events ultimately get to be covered by global warming).
        And I almost forgot. The ‘Zeroth’ law of global warming states, of course, that “It is worse than we thought”.

  1. I wondered just how long it would be until we had to start protecting sandwiches from these maniacs. Now I know.
    #Sandiwchesmattermost!
    These people really have nothing useful to do when they start something like this. What’s next? The cornbread I make to go with Tuscan bean soup? Am I going to be told to NOT make a healthy bowl of soup with chard or kale included using ingredients that are good for me because these layabouts in white coats have no real purpose in life, other than annoying the people whose taxes go into their grant moneys?
    If they want my sandwiches, they can just molon labe! I doubt they’ll last five seconds, never mind five minutes.
    I’m telling Mom, too.

      • … “watch out for that tuscan bean soup it can be a methane producer” … try adding some caraway seed to keep it down to a dull roar.

      • This bunch of slackers in white lab coats have me on a roll. Next time, I’m making 15-bean soup with ham (ham bone if I can find one) and whopping big chunks of cornbread.
        They are nutz. They serve no useful purpose. I will see if I can find a junkyard that will take them for a nominal fee.

      • I tell people I’m telling my teddy bear about the bad things they did to me, he sits on my bedside table and I’ve had him since I was a baby.
        As for their research…..
        Of the recipes considered, the most carbon-intensive variety is a ready-made ‘all-day breakfast’ sandwich which includes egg, bacon and sausage.
        Is one of my favourites and this ain’t going to stop me having one when I want.
        James Bull

      • 7 Bean (Hobo) Stew
        1 can white beans
        1 can pork and beans
        1 can kidney beans
        1 can pinto beans
        1 can black beans
        1 can baked beans
        1 can butter beans
        2 cups favorite BBQ sauce
        10 sausages (around 2 pounds) Polish, Italian (mild or spicy to your liking) Hot Link??
        1 lb browned ground beef
        6 strips of bacon browned and crumbled
        1 onion chopped
        Using a large slow cooker
        Drain 1/2 of the liquid from the cans and pour remainder into the crock pot
        Lightly Brown sausages (not thoroughly cooked), slice and place in pot
        Cook bacon, crumble and place in pot
        saute diced onion in Bacon Grease, add ground beef and brown/crumble beef
        Add beef/onion mixture and all liquid contents to pot
        Stir contants
        Cover and cook over medium for 6 hours
        Serve over rice
        Can accompany with Biscuits or Cornbread if desired

      • It is actually really good, though I did forget to mention adding the BBQ sauce prior to cooking
        And 1/2 tsp liquid smoke

  2. They are suggesting that we omit lettuce, tomato, cheese and meat from sandwiches. What have we left to put in? Tuna? Otherwise we are left with just a bread stick, and aren’t carbohydrates meant to be bad for us as they upset the insulin balance?
    And if we don’t eat sandwiches maybe we will have to stick to tofu and French fries.

    • No tuna! Remember, eating tuna results in dead dolphins, you don’t want that on your conscience, not only a bigger carbon footprint but killing lovable, brilliant cetaceans too!
      PMK

        • They say they don’t kill dolphins anymore, but can they back up that claim? I’ll bet they sell the delicious dolphin meat to sushi bars now…that would account for the lack of flavor in the canned tuna….

      • Almost all tuna in the USA came from San Diego. All the Tuna companies were headquartered there and the fleet was mostly Italian fisherman in Little Italy. Then came the dolphin free laws – which made fishing more dangerous for fisherman and caused insurance to go through the roof. They all shit down and now we get our “dolphin free” tuna from Indonesia – where I can be pretty sure that no one is really paying attention to whether dolphins are really dying – they just provide the logo.

      • Bacon – hickory smoked, pan-fried to a nice, crisp finish, added to the bottom, middle and top layers of a classic bacon-lettuce-and tomato sammich on dark pumpernickel (hard to find around here) or 12-grain thick-sliced pan bread… or just put it all on a plate, fork it and down it goes.

      • But what about my BLT’s? A nearly balanced meal between 2 slices of bread and tastes good as well.

    • No french fries. They’re just carbohydrates coated in vegetable oil. You have to eat the vegetable oil neat now.

  3. The number of people who will pay any attention to actually doing this will be 0.00000000001% (+/-)
    I bet even they won’t.

    • Until the doogooders enact laws. As an example in California there is a proposal to put waiters behind bars for 6 months for the crime of giving a straw to a customer – even those eco paper straws.

  4. Notice how the view of CO2 is always negative in these studies. If you want to locate the most important self and life sustaining material – it’s CO2. Trying to convince folks to change their lifestyle
    and providing illiterate arguments like “one sandwich is worth 12 miles of gas powered travel” is just plain incompetent. Any conceivable reductions of CO2 WRT sandwiches is totally insignificant, as is this pointless study.

  5. I’m going to make a special trip to Subway today. I’ll take the full size SUV and leave the compact car at home.

  6. Meanwhile, the first Earl of Sandwich no longer has a carbon footprint. So consider the alternative…

  7. Actually, I prefer my sandwiches “de-constructed” (that is the correct SJW restaurant term isn’t it)
    Nice bread roll with butter, some different cheeses and some quality ham (or other meat) on the side.
    Bit of salad tossed in a separate bowl.

  8. Every year I celebrate Earth Hour in terms of how wonderful is the bounty we enjoy and take for granted during our lives, such as energy delivered to our doorstep, being able to live in Canada (where 90% of the country would be uninhabitable for most of the population were it not for our wonderful power and transportation systems), AND going to the grocery store to buy a package of sliced ham, or Wendy’s for a burger and fries.
    Instead of turning off all the power in my home for an hour on Earth Day, I turn ON all of the lights, interior and exterior, take a picture of the house from across the street, and send copies to my friends and colleagues. (with a note that marvels at all of the wonders of modern technology, engineering, and society).
    Full disclosure: I’m a retired Field Development Petroleum Engineer. P.Eng. (Alberta)

    • Last time I even bothered about Earth hour, I set up 3600w of stage lighting in the back yard. (all the house circuits can take)
      Pretty reds and blues. 🙂
      disclosure….. . I have nothing to do with the coal, gas, oil industry except to use their products. 🙂

  9. And in California a bill has been introduced in the state legislature to fine up to $1000 and imprison for up to 6 months, any waiter who brings an unrequested plastic straw with a drink.
    I wonder if it is possible to somehow get all the crazies to live somewhere all together, so they do not bother the rest of us. California seems to be trying to put this into practice already. As someone else asked recently, forget about California seceding from the USA – is it possible for them to be ejected?

    • You have to build an enclosure around the place they inhabit, walls too high for them to climb and leaning slightly inward, and no escape hatches, either.
      No straws except on request, huh? Well, drinking straws are a necessary sanitary item, just like soap for used dishes. Without drinking straws, the possibility of transmitting nasty things like bad colds and mumps and the epizootic increase exponentially in the population. That means that, from now on, you’ll have to bring your own drinking vessel.

    • In one of my biology courses, a scenario was outlined that began with a massive earthquake causing California to separate from the continent. I do not remember the point of the exercise (something about population demographics or genetics), but this kind of insanity makes me think that such an occurrence might not be such a bad thing. Clearly the legislature has already separated from reality and reason.
      I have to wonder, is the problem the straw or that it was “unrequested”? The fact that a “requested” straw is apparently acceptable indicates that the bill is not really about straws at all…
      At least not drinking straws.

  10. If I make my own bread, shoot the deer in my yard, raise the duck meat, the tomatoes, ect, would I win any points with the AGW crowd? No? Thought so.

      • Nine foot fence around the garden prevents that. Deer repellent in the winter helps save the trees. However, the darn things like to hang out on the east side of the house right under a window, lazing around. I figure they owe me one or two corpses when hunting season rolls around.

  11. There was/is a school (for 5 to 11 year olds) somewhere here in England that recently took upon itself to police what the children brought in for their lunches. Obviously to impose ‘good health’
    Kids of that age cab be ‘determined little critters’ and the story went of one young lad who brought a sausage roll to school in his bait-box intended for lunch.
    Oh he11 no. Verboten. The offending sausage roll was confiscated.
    Of course, hapless kid is left with nothing for lunch so the education brain boxes that we now employ presented the young lad with a ham sandwich – to replace the sausage roll.
    Much healthier innit
    Let analyse this..
    Sausage roll = pastry (wheat flour combined with fat) wrapped around some precessed meat
    Ham sandwich = wheat flour (to make the bread), fat (margarine or butter) of some sort and then some processed meat (the actual ham) slapped in the middle.
    Exactly the same ingredients so how precisely is one of those recipes healthier than the other?
    Even worse is the ‘ham’ in the sandwich = a nice pink colour brought on by the use of nitrites – the new bogey men of human nutrition.
    And the people who call themselves ‘teachers’ actually pulled off this blinding feat of intelligence then, at going-home time, gave the kid his sausage roll back.
    Awww hark at me, I’ve just worked it out – we’ve a new Donald Trump here ain’t we?
    It was device used by the kid to get a free lunch.
    beautiful

  12. From the article: “Altogether the team looked at 40 different sandwich types, recipes and combinations.”
    Good God!

    • Once you do the basic math for the ingredients, additional sandwich types are a few minutes at most.

    • This one study may have broken the logjam in Brexit negotiations. Let them leave at no cost and we won’t look back.

      • Consider that the materials in a fried egg and bacon sandwich are mostly of local origin, and are fairly dense, so have low air miles for transportation. Now consider your bowl of cornflakes – ignoring any plastic toys. Materials imported from the corn producing states of the USA several thousand miles to the processing centre in the UK, ground up, liquefied and flattened and then dried to produce a very low density material, which needs very large boxes to contain 1 kg (you could probably get 10 kg or perhaps even 20 kg of sandwiches in the same sized box) and then transported a fair distance to somewhere else in the UK for you to buy, needing large lorries to carry a small load because of the low density. At least the milk is fairly high density, bing mostly water, and if you sprinkle sugar on it – it is only a small amount – it is local from the sugar beet fields of East Anglia, or wherever.
        I reckon that the fried egg and bacon sandwich beats the cornflakes hands down in the amount of beneficial fat, protein and vitamins, not to say the low air miles and cost, compared to the minimal amount of carbohydrate of the cornflakes, negligible vitamins (unless processed high vitamin milk) and small amount of carbohydrate of the added sugar.
        And remember that all carbohydrates are broken down in the body to sugars – I quote from
        Wikipaedia:
        “Although humans consume a variety of carbohydrates, digestion breaks down complex carbohydrates into a few simple monomers for metabolism: glucose, fructose, and galactose.[4] Glucose constitutes about 80% of the products, and is the primary structure that is distributed to cells in the tissues, where it is broken down or stored as glycogen.[3][4] In aerobic respiration, the main form of cellular respiration used by humans, glucose and oxygen are metabolized to release energy, with carbon dioxide and water as byproducts.[2] Most of the fructose and galactose travel to the liver, where they can be converted to glucose.[4]”
        So there!
        Even better, eat the fried eggs and bacon and forget the bread.

    • I think the creator of the study just really likes sandwiches and figured out how to get someone else to pay for them.

  13. I wonder what the climate impact of climate studies is.
    Condider the whole production chain – building the factory/university, then administering it, raising and training the academics for 20-30 years, the carbon costs of having people (awash with carbon!) doing the research and so on.
    This would have a much greater impact than store-bought sandwiches!
    Let’s fix this and start by removing thr people (carbon sinks!) From the universities, beginning if course with the climate researchers 😀

    • I support this idea. I thought of it, too, but in order to be all-encompassing and all-inclusive, you must include the carbon footprint of the crowd of people who support them but do not comply with the whole carbon reduction thing on a day-to-day basis.
      I submit cheerfully that by investigating the carbon generated by their use of computers, commuting whether by POV, bus, train or cab or walking, use of the very things they excoriate in others (fridges, furnaces, electricity, for examples), and an endless list of examples that expose their apostasy, we can easily demonstrate that not only are they adding exponentially to the carbon load in the atmosphere; they are also engaging in what appears to be fraudulent behavioral posturing and demands for more money for silly brain fart exercises.
      They should first have all their computers taken away from them and learn to use pencils and paper and their brains. There are other things that follow, but that’s a start. And no sandwiches for them, either. Eat the sandwiches right in front of them, or the mandarin beef with rice and egg rolls, and take them to task if they aren’t eating stone-cold tofu, no flavoring allowed.

  14. If you wander about the web you will find various internet forums where questions come up like “What can I do personally to help combat global warming?”
    It’s quite entertaining to engage with these as with a bit of careful banter you can get the point across that instead of giving up meat and cycling to work they will make a massively bigger contribution if they stop going on holiday abroad and get themselves castrated/sterilized. Then ask them if they will commit to doing these 2 things.Can be very funny!

    • OH, yes – please!!! Have your politicians/environtmentalists spay and neutered. I wrote an article on that a while back, posted elsewhere. Make sure they have all their shots, that they’re dewormed and possibly declawed, and also make sure they are ear-tipped and microchipped. Perhaps tattooed on the inside of one leg, or the upper lip like they do with racehorses?

  15. And the bread, you know that stuff is made to rise with CO2 bubbles !
    Should we switch to unleavened bread for sandwiches ?

    • I don’t know about that. I use crackers for a lot of things. And flatbread is THE oldest food item in use by humans, going back 10,000 years or maybe further. There’s also something they used to call hardtack which now comes in many flavors and sizes as Krisp flatbreads.
      Maybe we should use the Host wafers from Sunday communion? Before or after the Blessing? (Was that naughty of me?)

  16. I tried determining the amount of CO2 produced by driving a car 12 miles, and I think 1441 grams is erroneously low, more like driving a car 7 miles. I figure that if a car that gets 40 MPG is driven 12 miles while burning gasoline with a density of .719 g/ml and a chemical formula oversimplified to (CH2)n, the amount of CO2 produced is nearly 2600 grams.

      • Not if the car is properly tuned, and little if any of what is produced by the engine will survive the trip through the catalytic converter.

    • Gasoline is a blend of a number of different molecules. Not to mention some additives put in by the refiner.

    • Donald L. Klipstein
      January 25, 2018 at 11:15 am
      I tried determining the amount of CO2 produced by driving a car 12 miles, and I think 1441 grams is erroneously low, more like driving a car 7 miles. I figure that if a car that gets 40 MPG is driven 12 miles while burning gasoline with a density of .719 g/ml and a chemical formula oversimplified to (CH2)n, the amount of CO2 produced is nearly 2600 grams.

      I don’t think you are using the VW software correctly. If you do, it will come out quite a bit lower than expected. 🙂
      Do I need the sarc tag?
      SteveT

  17. I would like to think that this is a student prank; but suspect not; being an example of current university “SatanicCO2 Meme Groupthink” now gone viral in our educational establishments. Heaven help us and more importantly our children. Mental stress — Here we come if we take this seriously.
    PS: Exercise produces extra CO2. – Well known fact. Cyclists produce about 15 g/ kilometre. Now that IS something to worry about.😙🤥

    • Okay, if I have to drink out of a vessel (of any kind) that someone else used and I can’t have a straw without demanding it, and I get sick with some exotic, horrific brain-eating disease that causes constant runny nose syndrome, I will blame it on Ian Calderon and I will sue the pants off him in an ugly, long-drawn-out public battle. I will also sneeze violently in his general direction.
      I have said it. Thus it shall be.

  18. Here’s a relevant thread from 2011:
    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/06/16/ill-never-be-able-to-eat-kobe-beef-again/

    Anthony: It’s being called the “poop burger”. Japanese scientists have found a way to create artificial meat from sewage containing human feces.
    Roger Knights June 17, 2011 at 6:56 am
    Want flies with that?
    Anthony: REPLY: LOL! Quite possibly the most simultaneously disgusting, politically incorrect, and hilarious comment I have ever seen. Truly a poop de grace. – Anthony

  19. Anthony, maybe you can get Kenji a membership in the “British Sandwich Association” too?
    I’ve always suspected that Big Sandwich and the Coke Brothers were up to something.

  20. Stories like this one and alarmist rubbish from their climate scientist friends who regularly contribute to the “It’s worse than I thought Department” make me wonder how these people perform on a sort of “terminal Stupidity” index but after exhaustive studies, I realise that stupidity is a dimensionless property that knows no bounds. True stupidity really is infinite in its reach. However, take note that climate change may have an unfair advantage by boosting normal human stupidity by the use of computer models capable of achieving unimaginable stupidity if run on mainframes.

  21. ‘”Given that sandwiches are a staple of the British diet as well as their significant market share in the food sector, it is important to understand the contribution from this sector to the emissions of greenhouse gases.
    ‘For example, consuming 11.5 billion sandwiches annually in the UK generates, on average, 9.5 million tonnes of CO2 eq., equivalent to the annual use of 8.6 million cars.”
    So consuming fish and chips 11.5 billions times instead will generate how much tonnes of CO2 ?
    Nobody on the planet will ever feel guilty about eating food to survive on the planet Earth. All the food chain relies on CO2 and therefore it is essential for life. Why don’t you do us all a favor and stop eating food for ever because there is no where to avoid it by living.
    Unbelivable!
    https://youtu.be/m4j5wuhFZ_Y?t=1

  22. This paper would clearly be suitable for publication in The Onion. I found quite an entertaining satire. I really laughed at this part:
    “The study also recommends reducing or omitting certain ingredients that have a higher carbon footprint, like lettuce, tomato, cheese and meat.”
    I’d be left with two slices of bread with some mayo. LoL.

  23. #SandwichesMatterMost!
    #Stop Insulting Sandwiches!
    I may pay a visit to Subway myself and get the footlong BMT Italian and some chips.
    I just want to know if any of these geniuses are going to give up eating food and eat recycled carcboard instead. I hear it’s good with ketchup and a little Tabasco.

    • Many years ago, early nutrition scientists feedin corn flakes to rats were surprised to discover that they turned up their toes and died. Not enough nutrients, you see. The surprising part is that the rats that were fed the boxes the cornflakes came in, survived.

  24. I’m confused.
    To save the planet, should I have a hot dog without the bun or a bun without the hot dog?

    • No. You do it following these steps.
      1 – Find out who these bozos are and where they inhabit a spot at a unversity or college.
      2 – Visit the campus and the building where they work, with a large picnic basket full of really good things that smell wonderful, say a fragrant Italian beef with or without peppers, or a Philly cheeseteak w/fries, or a thin-sliced smoked ham with a high perfume and a lot of flavor, coupled with lettuce, tomatoes and your choice of sides (chips?).
      3 – Include a quart of unflavored tofu, some plastic bowls and a couple of spoons.
      4 – Invite them to enjoy lunch with your, but you eat the real food and they get the tofu. And only water to drink for them.
      5 – Indicate that you will do this every day until they leave their world of fantasy (university) and find real jobs asking people “would you like fries or onion rings with that?” at a Renaissance Faire.

      • I don’t have the time to do all those steps but, if someone else does, may I suggest that instead of plastic bowls and spoons they should be hand-carved wooden or sun-baked clay bowls and spoons?

  25. I like their suggestion that use-by and sell-by dates be extended or not taken literally.
    BTW, I’ve read that “food waste” statistics are inflated by counting rinds and such matter—and even packaging—as waste. And by guilt-tripping the consume for things that aren’t his fault, such as by counting supermarket discards of ugly veggies and post-harvest mold and rodent damage.

    • Their suggestion is a disgrace because use by dates are there for safety reasons. Food poisoning risk increases greatly eating after a use by date. Best before though are all about quality of product and will not harm.
      https://www.food.gov.uk/science/microbiology/use-by-and-best-before-dates
      “The ‘use by’ date is a really important one to take note of: after this date, the food may not be safe to eat. Foods that can cause harm when they go ‘off’ will be labelled with a use-by date.”

      • I found a little pot of tomato paste in my fridge yesterday.. “Best by 1.5.2012”
        Now we are talking FLAVOUR in a spag bol. !! 🙂

      • Oh, don’t feel bad, AndyG55. I found a jar of pasta sauce in the cupboard that is now 6 months past its expiration date. But since the tomato-based stuff I’m buying now is being extended to 3 years instead of 2, I’m thinking I can nuke the bugs (if any) in the microwave and still have some pasta sauce… or I canjust toss it and make the sauce from scratch.
        Here’s yer basic pasta sauce recipe: tomatoes; olive oi; garlic; salt. Simmer the tomatoes (canned are okay) and smush them a lot, on a very low heat, with the olive oil salt and garlic added at the start. Get this mix smushed to a paste, add a little more tomato and keep stirring so it won’t burn, then taste test it. You can also use a bain-marie to cook it to keep the tomatoes from burning. A small batch is better than wasting half a jar of commercial sauce.

      • After a certain length of time after the best before date, the quality of the product mainly becomes poor, so usually not worth eating or risking anyway.

      • Considering that the authors seem to be talking primarily about fresh food (i.e., produce, ready-made sandwiches, etc.), such a suggestion is alarming. Yes, many of these dates are conservative, but that is to decrease the chances that someone will get sick or worse. How many of us have had milk go sour or meat go “off” before the expiration/sell-by date? It happens even with precautions.
        I am all for reducing food waste, and I will eat processed foods after the sell/use/best by dates, but only to a point, and the dates definitely matter more for some foods than others. I would never eat a “fresh” pre-made sandwich that was made days before.

  26. Someone requested and was given a grant for this.
    Which is stupider? Hard to say.
    I’m sorry – these are the big brains these days?
    Oh well, this’ll just make my plot to destroy the world all the easier. I’ll just pack a lunch.

    • In 100,000 years, alien archeologists will determine that the foolish species went extinct because they ate too many concoctions consisting of protein and fiber layered between two carbohydrate sheets.

  27. Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds – An entire new volume could be written about the climate cult.

  28. Keeping sandwiches chilled in supermarkets and shops also contributes to their carbon footprint. This can account for up to a quarter of their greenhouse gas emission equivalent.

    Leaving a sandwich with meat in it at room temperature for too long can make it poisonous. A great way to get food poisoning. So if you want to avoid that, you should refrigerate it yourself anyway!
    Choose: CO2 or food poisoning. (Hint, we chose CO2 many decades ago because food poisoning sucks.)

  29. This reminded me of the Blues Brothers song Rubber Biscuit.
    “Have you ever heard of a wish sandwich? A wish sandwich is the kind of a
    sandwich where you have two slices of bread and you, hee hee hee, wish you
    had some meat…
    Bow bow bow.”

  30. “The study also recommends reducing or omitting certain ingredients that have a higher carbon footprint, like lettuce, tomato, cheese and meat.”
    So you can have a BLT so long as you don’t have any B, L or T.

  31. Maybe this team have pointed themselves in a rather silly direction by linking the production of some street foods to climate change, but underneath their research there is a serious topic .
    When I first started living in London as a student in the 60s the main line stations had no eating facilities apart from crisps’ dispensers and maybe a bar that no sane person would enter , being full of Millwall or QPR football fans.
    Now when I pass through termini such as Paddington or Victoria I am overwhelmed by the smell and sight of innumerable burger sellers, baguette stall and coffee outlets .No matter what the hour or the footfall through the concourse these places are full of food . It cannot all be eaten in a day . To reheat it would be dangerous and illegal and the bread will stale and become unsaleable .
    So what happens to it? Landfill, incineration? There is a carbon footprint , but there is surely also enormous waste which some might find slightly offensive when many people inside and outside our country are undernourished. Mind you it does not stop me enjoying these facilities when I need them so I am no doubt a hypocrite.
    I once read that the sandwiches at, I think ,one outlet in Manchester airport were not prepared here but prepared and flown in from New York where the labour was so much cheaper. Now there is a carbon footprint. .

  32. Lets just cut to the chase & get to the underlying premise on all of this – people are bad & the world would be such a better place without us & all our “carbon emissions “
    Moronic .
    Written from my favorite sandwich shop…

  33. There aren’t enough beautiful people to cause any problem eating sandwiches, it’s from too many of those “other” people eating them.

  34. When I read the findings of studies like these, I wonder how anyone can justify wasting tax money on something that simply says ‘in your face’ with no solution to the perceived problem.
    The people who cooked up this nonsense presented a “problem” that does not really exist to justify their grant request, done in a way that any bright teen with an agile mind could dismantle in the blink of an eye.
    Presenting this as a problem requires a solution, which they did not propose at all. Therefore, their entire piece of work is totally bogus, man!!!!

  35. “The greatest contributor to the carbon footprint of both types of sandwich is the agricultural production of ingredients, …”
    News Flash! – “Carbon based life discovered to make carbon foot print!”
    What is the carbon footprint of government waste such as the over production needed to generate the tax to fund “studies” like this one?

  36. What??? No mention of PB&J?
    I wonder if I could get a grant to research the demographics of people who put the PB on one slice of bread and the J on the other then stick them together versus putting the PB on one slice and the J on top of the PB then adding the second slice of bread on top of that.

  37. Which kind of mustard is the least dirty carbon emitter?
    I bet it’s Grey Poupon.
    Study that. It’s important we know the contribution of mustard condiments to climate change you know…

  38. Altogether the team looked at 40 different sandwich types, recipes and combinations. They found the highest carbon footprints for the sandwiches with pork meat (bacon, ham or sausages) and those containing cheese or prawns.
    The sandwich with the lowest carbon emission equivalent is a simple home-made favourite, ham and cheese.
    Help me with the logic, please. Eating ham and cheese from McDonalds is the worst thing one can eat, but making a sandwich at home with the same ingredients is the best thing to eat?
    Seems to me that the only difference is the extra effort it takes to walk to the corner restaurant

    • If the sandwiches that have the highest carbon footprint are those containing ham and those containing cheese, how can the lowest be one that contains both?

      • Tom in Florida
        January 25, 2018 at 2:31 pm
        If the sandwiches that have the highest carbon footprint are those containing ham and those containing cheese, how can the lowest be one that contains both?

        Keep up Tom. If CO2 causes warming and cooling what stops cheese and ham being bad and good?
        Just following climate change logic has to have this conclusion.
        SteveT

  39. Little doubt that these Climate Cult ‘researchers’ are a couple of sandwiches short of a picnic.
    But, on the other hand, perhaps this blatant stupidity was motivated by charging all the team’s lunches for a month or two, to their ‘research’ grant (and hence to the taxpayer).
    What a bunch of Oxygen thieves.

  40. “…. it is important to understand the contribution from this sector to the emissions of greenhouse gases”. No it’s not.

  41. I am from Manchester so I will translate the message for those from just down road like.
    Wot folks at University – ya know, those fancy buildings between the curry mile and City centre on Oxford Road – are trying to sell us is that all those fancy butties posh folk down South ‘ave from Subway like are driving up global temperatures. They say stick to traditional butties from Greggs, such as oven bottoms wi’ a bit of ham & cheese and your kids, kids will be saying ta very much for saving the planet. Even better still make your own, and wrap in newspaper rather than plastic.
    Remember of course not to digress. Wholemeal bread and egg cause can cause personal emissions of a gas twenty-five times more deadly than CO2. And do please remember to forsake the curry mile, which can have similar impacts.
    Translation : “butties” is Mancunian for “sandwiches“.

  42. So my response is that I will make a point of making sandwiches with at least three different types of meat and exotic fillers from as many different regions of the world as possible and then drive at least twelve miles to a nice picnic spot to eat it. There…that should add so life giving CO2 to the atmosphere.

  43. For people with calcium oxalate kidney stones, who are trying to follow a low oxalate diet, … tofu, spinach, and rye are ALL on the “avoid” list, as each is fairly high in oxalates, especially spinach.
    But, hey, kidney stones are a small price to pay for a healthy environment where we suffer with them. The solution seems clear, however — ask for the voluntary self-extermination of all people with calcium oxalate kidney stones. Think of the children.

  44. Drive to the FURTHEST sandwich shop! Don’t these people hear how stupid they sound? They unconvince me more and more with their every word. When they all start moving to the arctic is when I’ll believe we might have a problem. Until then I see nothing to dislike about being warmer. I think in less than 3 years we’re all going to wish Global Warming was true. Sun has been very very quiescent. Not good for temps. Any speculation any where about why the Sun has gone so quiet?

    • When they all start moving to the Arctic is when I celebrate that the loonies are leaving. They can create their own little utopia with all of their crazy ideas and leave the rest of us the heck alone.

    • Yes, but there’s no land for them to sit on in the Arctic. If they move up there, they will install solar furnaces which will threaten snowy owls and make the ice melt. They will then sink into the icy-cold water and flounder…. Oh.
      Never mind.

  45. If they really want people to change their behavior, they should address the matter this way:
    It is way cheaper to make your own sandwich at home. Save “X” pounds/dollars a year!

  46. Have they calculated the impact of a peanut butter and jelly sandwich?
    This is a prime example of too much funding in the area of climate science. What did they think the outcome of this study was going to be, people stop eating?

    • Once upon a time Manchester University had intelligent people studying and working there. Soon there will be no Subway (gone out of business) waiting to employ them when they finish their degrees.
      SteveT

  47. “The sandwich with the lowest carbon emission equivalent is a simple home-made favourite, ham and cheese.”

    Amazing how that works!
    A home made sandwich made of components purchased at grocery stores; sometimes at one grocery store.
    Allegedly causes the lowest CO2 impacts; yet identical commercially made sandwiches made with commercially distributed components cause higher levels of CO2 emissions?
    One thing is clear, the researchers are quite blinded by confirmation bias.

    “The results show the largest contributor to a sandwich’s carbon footprint is the agricultural production and processing of their ingredients. Depending on the type, this can account for around 37%-67% of CO2 eq. for ready-made sandwiches.”

    That sure sounds like an indictment against all foods. Why pick on sandwiches.

    “Keeping sandwiches chilled in supermarkets and shops also contributes to their carbon footprint. This can account for up to a quarter of their greenhouse gas emission equivalent. Then there is the packaging material which comes in at up to 8.5 % and, finally, transporting materials and refrigerating sandwiches themselves adds a further 4%.”

    That school of alleged “chemical engineering and analytical sciences” appears to have quite a few difficulties with real objects in a real world.
    A) How do these folks determine exactly how much cooling is required for a sandwich?
    Their results sound suspiciously like calculating the gross energy demands and construction emissions then dividing by a small amount of sandwiches.
    What is absent in this group’s study are any tendrils of common sense.
    Tofu sandwiches require significant processing just to produce tofu.
    It is not science.
    According to these lunatics; food should be much more expensive than it is.
    Obviously all commercial food growers, producers, processors, distribution, selling, etc. should go out of business.
    Focusing their results on sandwiches ignores the end result that is a demand for people should starve.

  48. How anyone can still deny the new world order is not a theory is beyond me.
    Complete surveillance, check
    Long term population reduction, check
    Destroying nationhood, check
    Homogenizing cultures by forcing an influx of immigrants who care not about the country, check
    Poisoning the water, air, and food, check
    Destroying the family unit, check
    Endless war, check
    Cashless society, nearly check
    Biometric surveillance, check
    Transhumanist AI agenda, check
    Androgenous society of confusion, check
    Smart grid energy control, check
    Using the vital life nutrient carbon as Boogeyman, literally this is an attack on life itself because these people are legitimately satanic. Controlling everyone and everything based on the one tax no one can escape. Carbon dioxide output. From birth, a human will immediately begin amazing carbon debts that need repayed beginning when of working age and without cash they can shut off your ability to access anything in the market with the biometrics. The drones monitor the no-human zones (which are extensive BTW just review the agenda 21/2030 maps)… And on and on
    Ten years ago I certainly had a harder time believing it possible, or even proving it. Now, they don’t even hide it anymore. That disgusting sandwich nonsense is predictive programming. Getting the population rest to accept this as normalcy.
    It’s time for us to do something about this, but logical folk and not Marxists trend to be so individualistic that we rarely unite. I don’t have the answers but the evidence is mounting faster every day.

  49. This has been fun. I’m sure there is more to come. But, Anthony, you misspelled the proper name of the subject at hand.
    It should be SAMMICHES! 2 ms, as in ‘make me a sammich, da==it!’

  50. I’ll give you my Philly cheesesteak sandwich when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.
    Combine it with cheese fries and there’s no telling the depths I might go, to protect them.

  51. Yeah, there are so many 10s of thousands of climate ‘scientists’ (remember Cooks analysis over 13000 papers over ten years), that they are casting about to find topics that haven’t been worked to the bone. How do they do this without laughing their a55es off? Its because we are flooding scientific institutions with sub 100 Is a since the doors were thrown wide open.

  52. Eating all that meat with the resulting additional CO2 emissions has a positive feedback……….more food produced, more food to eat (-:
    More food for animals to eat…… more animal meat to eat by humans…….more CO2 produced……… more food for humans and animals……..
    http://www.fao.org/worldfoodsituation/csdb/en/
    “Following this month’s further upward revision to the forecast for the 2017 global cereal production, world cereal supplies in the 2017/18 season are expected to rise to an all-time high of nearly 3 331 million tonnes. While global cereal utilization in 2017/18 is also heading for an increase (1.2 percent) from the previous season, world cereal inventories are projected to climb steadily for the fifth consecutive season, rising to a record high level of almost 726 million tonnes.”
    And the non edible plant world loves it too!
    “Carbon Dioxide Fertilization Greening Earth, Study Finds”
    https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth
    Carbon is a SOLID. CO2 is a beneficial GAS. Eating sandwiches is not resulting in a “carbon footprint” which is just a made up bullshit term. Carbon, the solid has no effect on global warming. Carbon compounds form the basis for all life on earth.
    When you irrigate your lawn with H2O are you leaving a hydrogen footprint?
    “Carbon footprint” “Climate Crisis” “Catastrophic Anthropocentric Global Warming” “Extreme Weather” “Unprecedented Weather/Climate” Bullshit!
    The last 4 decades have featured the best weather/climate and especially CO2 conditions for most life on this greening and slightly warmer planet since the Medieval Warm Period, 1,000 years ago that was this warm globally……….before people ate so many meat loaded sandwiches.

  53. They found the highest carbon footprints for the sandwiches with pork meat (bacon, ham or sausages) and those containing cheese or prawns.
    ………………………………………..
    The sandwich with the lowest carbon emission equivalent is a simple home-made favourite, ham and cheese.

    Well that’s good to know
    Oh, wait. There must be a difference between a “carbon footprint” and a “carbon emission equivalent”
    Now I’ve got it.

  54. Sandwiches are pretty terrible over the counter in England. i can’t really complain if they improve the quality by whingeing about CO2. Seriously shoddy sandwichmanship needs to be righted.

  55. Climate change – is there ANYTHING it can’t do? And to think, Man causes it all! We are like gods! Maybe better! And look at all the employment it’s caused…

    • NotChickenLittle “Climate change – is there ANYTHING it can’t do?”
      Yes– it can’t prove a negative, because that is the entire fallacy that is climate change… and as I explained, it’s the fault of mainstream scientists themselves for allowing themselves to be baited into refuting the panic-mongers, against scientific protocols of first requiring them to validate their hypothesis… and this opened Pandora’s Box.

  56. Those that believe that the burning of fossil fuels is a bad thing should stop making use of all goods and services that make use of fossil fuels in any way. After all it is their money that keeps the fossil fuel companies in business and it is their actions that actually have caused fossil fuels to be burned. For example, most food that we buy is produced and transported by the use of fossil fuels so do not buy or eat any such foods. The clothes one wears were at the very least transported via the use of fossil fuels so do not wear clothes. Most man made structures and surfaces involved the use of fossil fuels so do not go into any man made structure or walk on any man made surface such as asphault, concrete, wood or any man made road or trail. Most water that you find has been transported using pipes or water chanels that are man made so do not drink any. Do not avail oneself of modern medicine because it all has involved the use of fossil fuels. So it is a lot more than the sandwitch that is at fault here.

  57. Yes, of course sandwiches have a carbon footprint.
    To be spiritually in tune with Gaia, we must all be hunter-gatherers (without fire) so we have no carbon footprint. Of course that would require 99% of the people on earth to die miserable deaths. It would all be worth it though, because the researchers at the University of Manchester could feel really good about themselves – at least until they were torn apart and eaten by other starving humans.

    • I’m afraid that’s impossible, because actually, agriculture began because humans completely populated the Earth, and there was simply nothing left to “Hunt and gather,” and so agriculture was essential to provide enough food for the growing population. Then undeveloped Farmland ran out, and organized religion began, in order to maximize population-growth in order to claim and defend it against rival civilizations.
      So now here we are with 7 billion people, less than 1% of which can be fed by Paleolithic means; but the good news for feeding the rest, is that you can’t eat to produce carbon, without growing the food to absorb it first from The Atmosphere, by photosynthesis….I.e. SOLAR POWER!
      That’s going to drive the climate-kooks insane, even more than they already are.

      • You basically have it all upside down.
        It’s not true that agriculture began because there was simply nothing left to “Hunt and gather”. Fishers kept fishing, and rulers kept hunting, and all of them always had plenty game.
        Agriculture most probably began for religious reason, some sort of sacrifice as memorial to people dead out of hunger (while wine libation will not grow a vine, a grain offering WILL, if done properly, grow you back grain), and developed because of practical (more food produced) and cultural advantages (top class kept hunting, and owned cattle, lower class were told to grow their food the way taught by priests — a vegetal, low grade food that put them at a disadvantage). Rival civilizations never was the main issue, only a second concern, after the control by rulers on their own of the same civilization.

      • I respectively disagree.
        In the U.S. you can drive for hours and see nothing but forest.
        Then park the car and walk for hours thru the forest, generally never seeing any sign of humanity once you are a mile down the “trail”.
        It clears the mind….. you do tend to “check your six” occasionally, what with the bears/wolves/cougars roaming around.

      • Agriculture may have begun when CO2 levels were high enough to support it.
        http://www.worldclimatereport.com/archive/previous_issues/vol3/v3n14/greening.htm says in small part:

        Because atmospheric CO2 directly affects photosynthesis and plant productivity, this rise in CO2 must have increased the performance of many forerunners of modern agricultural plants. Importantly, not all plants felt the same benefits—weedy plants were losing out to plants favored by early agriculturists.
        One of Sage’s more compelling arguments comes from the remarkable synchrony of agricultural development around the world. Wheat, barley, lentils, and chickpeas were all domesticated in the Middle East by 10,000 years ago. In eastern Asia, rice and millets were domesticated 9,000 years ago.

  58. “A carbon footprint?” Wow, I am really uneducated… I didn’t even know that carbon had feet!

  59. Hey I know: GLOBAL CANNIBALISM!
    Two birds, one stone.
    We’ll start with the Manchester sandwich.

  60. Climate “science” and narrative “scientists” and “journalists” have replaced shamans arguing and constantly gossiping that we are angering the spirits—that’s why we have bad luck . . . weather . . and bad hair days. Anyone who disagrees is a heretic snd needs to be burned at the stake.

  61. How does a sandwich for lunch compare with the French 2 hour lunch in terms of Carbon Footprints?

  62. Now we know why “Lilo & Stitch” experiment 625, the sandwich-loving one, really WAS a scary monster, after all.

  63. If you live in Sandwich, Kent, UK, you should be really worried about the re-sale value of your house now….

  64. Ummmm…if you leave out lettuce, tomato, cheese and/or meat, what the hell is in the sandwich? Maybe we’ll all be eating bread sandwiches!I Or we’re all going to be condemned to an eternity of tunafish, sans lettuce or tomato. But won’t the poor tuna be over-fished and become extinct, which should surely trouble all the greenies in the world? BTW, coffee is now being debated as a carcinogen in California, and french fries and potato chips are already labeled as such. Maybe we’re all simply going to be reduced to a lifetime of bread and water!
    Actually, I think that the idea is to starve the species homo sapiens into extinction, and leave the planet to the animals and insects…which, considering the IQ level of greenies, leftists and progressives, may not be such a bad idea.

  65. Oddly mad ideas like this may be a very good way to kill off the whole AGW BS , for they both seen are stupid and a real threat to people’s normal way of life beyond what they are realistically willing to give in order to ‘save the planet ‘
    The madder the better, the more extreme the demands and claims, the faster the end comes for their game. For rule one of politics is get elected, and rule two is stay elected and if the voters turn so the money tap gets turned off as the political will drains away.

  66. It’s that hoary old one about life being like a s*#t sandwich. The more bread you’ve got the less s*#t you have to put up with and they sure got the grants so eat up.

  67. We should feel bad for simply living. Reminds me of Sheryl Crow giving us advice on how much toilet paper to use. Go away please.

  68. I wonder how many sandwiches Al Gore packed away over the years while jet setting around in the big league of jet fuel carbon emitting.

Comments are closed.