France uses a nutritional rating system for the front of food packaging called a "Nutri-Score." Other countries have introduced similar initiatives, but supposedly France was the first to use this particular rating system, which ranges from A (best) to E (worst).
Here's what it looks like on a package of chorizo:
France uses a nutritional rating system for the front of food packaging called a "Nutri-Score." Other countries have introduced similar initiatives, but supposedly France was the first to use this particular rating system, which ranges from A (best) to E (worst).
Here's what it looks like on a package of chorizo:
Nutri-Scores were first introduced in supermarkets in 2017 and are applied on a voluntary basis. But having been in a handful of French grocery stores over the last week, I can tell you that it is widely used. So much so that I was more surprised when it wasn't there. What might they be trying to hide?
The Nutri-Score is also widely supported by the general public and, according to some surveys, nearly 90% of the French population believe that it should be mandatory on all food packaging.
So how does it work? The system is based on an algorithm that looks out for good stuff like fruits and vegetables, fiber, protein, and healthy oils, while penalizing bad stuff like sugar, saturated fat, and sodium, among other things.
It's an algorithm that is likely to be in constant flux. My understanding is that they have special rules for things like cheese. But regardless, I find that this simple rating system has a significant impact on my buying and eating decisions. Take the above chorizo. It has a score of "E." Do I really want that or should I go for the jambon next door that has a rating of "B?"
This also made me think of France's mandatory Energy Performance Certificate (or Diagnostic de Performance Énergétique). This is a diagnostic that is required of all properties being sold or rented in the country.
It ranks both energy consumption and CO2 emissions from A (most efficient) to G (least efficient). It also provides recommended renovations. And if you lie — and actual performance deviates too far from the stated rating — you could be in trouble.
But just like the Nutri-Score, I am sure that these energy efficiency scores similarly affect buying and renting decisions, especially if there's a capital expenditure recommendation tied to a low score.
This is how commercial real estate is bought and sold. A building condition assessment is done, somebody comes up with a cost for all the work that will need to be done, and then it gets factored into the price: "Yeah, so, I was going to pay you $50 million, but now I have to spend $2 million on CapEx."
But on the residential side, I don't think this is often the case. Not unless someone is measuring performance and telling you what improvements should be made and, in some cases, need to be made for the property to be legally rentable. Out of sight is out of mind.
No businessperson, landlord, or entrepreneur wants to deal with more bureaucracy and red tape. But I'm of the strong opinion that too much of the food we eat is over-processed shit. I also believe in continually striving to be better — especially when it comes to our built environment. And that starts with measurement and benchmarking.
By some measurements, cement production alone is responsible for about 8% of human-caused carbon dioxide emissions every year. And so there is an imperative to find suitable low-carbon alternatives. Here is what is currently happening in the US (via Grist):
On Tuesday, Terra CO2 Technology was picked to receive a $52.6 million federal grant to build a new manufacturing plant just west of Salt Lake City. The company has devised a method that turns common minerals into additives that can help replace Portland cement — a key component in concrete, and one of the most carbon-intensive materials in the world.
In addition to this new facility, the company is set to start construction on its first plant in the Dallas-Fort Worth area:
The project is expected to break ground in January 2025 and begin shipping out materials by late summer 2026, Yearsley said. The facility will be capable of producing up to 240,000 metric tons of SCM [supplementary cementitious materials] per year when completed, or enough to serve roughly half of the local metropolitan market.
And all of this is part of a broader initiative by the US Department of Energy:
The Utah facility is one of 14 projects provisionally selected this week to receive $428 million in total awards from the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Manufacturing and Energy Supply Chains. The initiative, which is funded by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, aims to accelerate clean energy manufacturing in U.S. communities with decommissioned coal facilities. Officials said the projects are expected to create over 1,900 high-quality jobs across a dozen states.
For the rest of the article, click here.
Yeah, I can't say I'm excited to try this. Japan Airlines has just launched a new year-long pilot allowing its passengers to reserve and rent clothes. The way it works is that you tell them what you're traveling for and then you get something like a "spring/fall x smart casual" variety pack delivered to your hotel or Airbnb.
The clothes, which look something like this, are a mix of excess stock and second-hand stuff, and so it is being positioned as a more sustainable choice. You're both using clothes that might otherwise go to waste and you're reducing the amount of weight that you're traveling with. (You still need to bring your own underwear.)
And this could add up:
The site handling the clothing rental system claims that a 10kg reduction in a flight passenger’s luggage results in an estimated 7.5kg reduction in carbon dioxide emissions. A 7.5kg reduction in CO₂ emissions, it adds for reference, is the equivalent of forgoing using a hairdryer for 78 days (based on an average use of 10 mins per drying session).
I suppose this could also be positioned as a convenience: why lug a suitcase full of clothes around when you can just reserve what you want and have it waiting for you at your hotel? But I also suppose that you need to be okay wearing well-used clothes. Maybe this matters less, though, if the clothes are really nice and fashionable?
I don't know. It'll be interesting to see if there's a market for this.
I would also say that even though I may not be excited about rental clothes, I take great pride in packing efficiently for travel. Unless I'm going snowboarding, I basically do not check a bag. I can do 2 weeks just fine with a carry-on and, to be honest, there's something liberating about reducing your belongings to only what is necessary.
So who knows, maybe bringing only underwear and toiletries would be even more liberating.
Nutri-Scores were first introduced in supermarkets in 2017 and are applied on a voluntary basis. But having been in a handful of French grocery stores over the last week, I can tell you that it is widely used. So much so that I was more surprised when it wasn't there. What might they be trying to hide?
The Nutri-Score is also widely supported by the general public and, according to some surveys, nearly 90% of the French population believe that it should be mandatory on all food packaging.
So how does it work? The system is based on an algorithm that looks out for good stuff like fruits and vegetables, fiber, protein, and healthy oils, while penalizing bad stuff like sugar, saturated fat, and sodium, among other things.
It's an algorithm that is likely to be in constant flux. My understanding is that they have special rules for things like cheese. But regardless, I find that this simple rating system has a significant impact on my buying and eating decisions. Take the above chorizo. It has a score of "E." Do I really want that or should I go for the jambon next door that has a rating of "B?"
This also made me think of France's mandatory Energy Performance Certificate (or Diagnostic de Performance Énergétique). This is a diagnostic that is required of all properties being sold or rented in the country.
It ranks both energy consumption and CO2 emissions from A (most efficient) to G (least efficient). It also provides recommended renovations. And if you lie — and actual performance deviates too far from the stated rating — you could be in trouble.
But just like the Nutri-Score, I am sure that these energy efficiency scores similarly affect buying and renting decisions, especially if there's a capital expenditure recommendation tied to a low score.
This is how commercial real estate is bought and sold. A building condition assessment is done, somebody comes up with a cost for all the work that will need to be done, and then it gets factored into the price: "Yeah, so, I was going to pay you $50 million, but now I have to spend $2 million on CapEx."
But on the residential side, I don't think this is often the case. Not unless someone is measuring performance and telling you what improvements should be made and, in some cases, need to be made for the property to be legally rentable. Out of sight is out of mind.
No businessperson, landlord, or entrepreneur wants to deal with more bureaucracy and red tape. But I'm of the strong opinion that too much of the food we eat is over-processed shit. I also believe in continually striving to be better — especially when it comes to our built environment. And that starts with measurement and benchmarking.
By some measurements, cement production alone is responsible for about 8% of human-caused carbon dioxide emissions every year. And so there is an imperative to find suitable low-carbon alternatives. Here is what is currently happening in the US (via Grist):
On Tuesday, Terra CO2 Technology was picked to receive a $52.6 million federal grant to build a new manufacturing plant just west of Salt Lake City. The company has devised a method that turns common minerals into additives that can help replace Portland cement — a key component in concrete, and one of the most carbon-intensive materials in the world.
In addition to this new facility, the company is set to start construction on its first plant in the Dallas-Fort Worth area:
The project is expected to break ground in January 2025 and begin shipping out materials by late summer 2026, Yearsley said. The facility will be capable of producing up to 240,000 metric tons of SCM [supplementary cementitious materials] per year when completed, or enough to serve roughly half of the local metropolitan market.
And all of this is part of a broader initiative by the US Department of Energy:
The Utah facility is one of 14 projects provisionally selected this week to receive $428 million in total awards from the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Manufacturing and Energy Supply Chains. The initiative, which is funded by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, aims to accelerate clean energy manufacturing in U.S. communities with decommissioned coal facilities. Officials said the projects are expected to create over 1,900 high-quality jobs across a dozen states.
For the rest of the article, click here.
Yeah, I can't say I'm excited to try this. Japan Airlines has just launched a new year-long pilot allowing its passengers to reserve and rent clothes. The way it works is that you tell them what you're traveling for and then you get something like a "spring/fall x smart casual" variety pack delivered to your hotel or Airbnb.
The clothes, which look something like this, are a mix of excess stock and second-hand stuff, and so it is being positioned as a more sustainable choice. You're both using clothes that might otherwise go to waste and you're reducing the amount of weight that you're traveling with. (You still need to bring your own underwear.)
And this could add up:
The site handling the clothing rental system claims that a 10kg reduction in a flight passenger’s luggage results in an estimated 7.5kg reduction in carbon dioxide emissions. A 7.5kg reduction in CO₂ emissions, it adds for reference, is the equivalent of forgoing using a hairdryer for 78 days (based on an average use of 10 mins per drying session).
I suppose this could also be positioned as a convenience: why lug a suitcase full of clothes around when you can just reserve what you want and have it waiting for you at your hotel? But I also suppose that you need to be okay wearing well-used clothes. Maybe this matters less, though, if the clothes are really nice and fashionable?
I don't know. It'll be interesting to see if there's a market for this.
I would also say that even though I may not be excited about rental clothes, I take great pride in packing efficiently for travel. Unless I'm going snowboarding, I basically do not check a bag. I can do 2 weeks just fine with a carry-on and, to be honest, there's something liberating about reducing your belongings to only what is necessary.
So who knows, maybe bringing only underwear and toiletries would be even more liberating.
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
