Totally agree, the ecofriendly part of huel would be missed, its like selling water which would be the 80% of the bottle.
If only the bottles coul offer a 1,5 liter option… that would be the only way to reduce the impact.
I can imagine a 0,4-0,6 liters as the normal bottle, but the big one would be great
Yes definitely. What’s the hassle in taking your huel in a small Tupperware container for example
I don’t think creating a bottled version will be a problem for the environment. Just because a bottled version exists doesn’t mean you quit using the powder where possible. The bottled version will give convenience for those situations where you can’t / forgot to make arrangement for having the powder.
So, for those that care about the environment, the bottled version will leave consumption of the powder unchanged (it’s used everywhere possible) but give a healthier alternative wherever powder isn’t possible.
Notice that I said alternative: instead of buying the bottled Huel, you would’ve bought something else anyway, and that something else would also be damaging to the environment. Just because Huel releases a bottled version doesn’t mean you’ll start eating more!
The environmental damage happens through consumption of Huel, as opposed to some other unhealthy food. The overall damage remains the same, but with the benefit of improved health!
When Huel starts making bottles, they’ll reduce demand (and therefore supply) from other food companies, ultimately maintaining the overall waste production. There will just be an increase in Huel’s contribution to environmental degradation, and a theoretically equal* drop in other companies’ contribution.
*that is assuming the same number of calories of food produce the same about of waste. Naturally Huel has the advantage that it probably produces less waste per calorie. But this is an additional advantage. Even if waste production per calorie was the same as anything else, you can see there won’t be increase in waste overall, just an increase in Huel’s waste production.
One last thing: being concerned about reducing overall environmental damage (sum of all companies and human activity) is great, but then Huel isn’t the greatest contributor (nor is it in significant need for improvement). Other targets will yield greater benefits.
Everything you wrote before the following is irrelevant to the impact of RTD packaging on the environment.
And this is simply wrong. That isn’t how capitalism works. It constantly strives to drive up consumption by any means necessary; it has a certain purity to it & sort of works, for a while. There are a couple of issues. If we restrict ourselves to only consider food production we can observe that capitalism is quite happy to breed fat stupid consumers at massive cost to society, simply to feed its own needs (a desire for unending growth).
The structures we build in society must serve the needs of the individual & the needs of the culture which are interdependent. Capitalism, communism & every other stupid idea we’ve experienced are all very poor early attempts at solving this design challenge.
I didn’t bother reading the rest of your post. Sorry, don’t mean to be rude (for once ;), just feel like I’m having a protracted mental breakdown. Too much rage at the 7.6bn idiots around me.
