There's a photograph of a sandwich doing the rounds on 'x' showing a sandwich with a label - “Eating this uses 8.1% of your daily dietary carbon allowance” .
It’s a subtle shift from informing to influencing wrapped in eco-language. That label isn’t about data, it’s about behavioural steering. It implies you have a daily carbon quota (which you don’t) and eating this sandwich is using up part of it (like sinning in grams). You should therefore feel something - guilt, virtue, restraint.
It’s not aimed at people tracking their emissions; it’s aimed at the already eco-conscious, the ones who might pause at the counter and think twice. It works by moral association, not mathematical precision and that’s the worrying bit. Food is already moralised enough through calories, fat, sugar and now this adds a new layer of worthiness. “Eat less carbon” quickly turns into “feel bad for lunch.”
Useful awareness tool? Maybe, but creeping behavioural conditioning - that's a definite. The best option for you, the planet, and Raynor's is, don't buy it, don't eat it, get a guilt ridden cheeseburger and enjoy - link - More like this - link - More like this - link - More like this (carbon) - link
No comments:
Post a Comment