[Greenbuilding] Yes, but is it Green ?

[sanjay jain]

Kat, 


You are right of course, the problem is the burning of fossil fuels. In an ideal world, you could put CO2 in sodas without using sequestered CO2, but as we all know farming relies heavily on fossil fuels. See note below on energy required to produce food. So in effect it is sequestered CO2.

And of course the drinks are transported using fossil fuels. I suspect Coke would not exist in a sustainable lifestyle. We could have local soda companies but not the multi-national Coke that currently exists. Coke pretending to be green is a joke.

http://www.sustainabletable.org/issues/energy/

Fossil Fuels and Industrial Farming
Conventional food production and distribution requires a
								tremendous amount of energy—one study conducted in 2000
								estimated that ten percent of the energy used annually in the
								United States was consumed by the food industry.ix Yet for all the energy we put into our food system, we don’t get very much out. A 2002 study from the John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health estimated that, using our current system, three calories of energy were needed to create one calorie of edible food. And that was on average. Some foods take far more, for instance grain-fed beef, which requires thirty-five calories for every calorie of beef produced. x What’s more, the John Hopkins study didn’t include the energy used in processing and transporting food. Studies that do estimate that it takes an average of seven to ten calories of input energy to produce one calorie of food.xi

~sanjay
PS - Full disclosure: I had a soda this afternoon and a beer recently 



________________________________
 From: Kat <molasses at q.com>
To: sanjay jain <sanjayjainuk at yahoo.co.uk>; Green Building <greenbuilding at lists.bioenergylists.org> 
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 3:50 PM
Subject: Re: [Greenbuilding] Yes, but is it Green ?
 

The problem isn't really CO2 but the constant massive input of more CO2 from the burning of sequestered CO2 (fossil fuels).  Yeasts turning stuff into beer releases no sequestered CO2.  I also (not knowing the process) question the idea that putting bubbles in Coke releases sequestered CO2.

-Kat

On 1/12/2012 10:19 AM, sanjay jain wrote: 

>
>>How many Western mega-building corps would have the nads to put "Sustainable" in their name and keep a straight face ?
>
>Maybe not in the name... but Coke seems to be doing a lot of
            green-washing with their save the polar bears campaign with
            WWF.
>
>Given that Coke's main product is a greenhouse gas "Carbon
            Dioxide" it's somewhat ironic that they try to get people to
            believe they care about the environment.
>
>Having said that, I assume their CO2 gas comes from beer, so
            perhaps beer drinkers are more at fault!
>
>~sanjay
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20120112/ff697013/attachment.html>