Connect with us

News

Is getting food delivered worse for the climate? Sometimes it’s better

Published

on

Is getting food delivered worse for the climate? Sometimes it’s better

Micaeli and Gerhard du Plessis sometimes use a grocery delivery service, as well as prepackaged meal kits, and they get takeout delivered to their suburban Washington, D.C., home about once a week. With two full-time jobs and two children, it makes time-saving sense. But they’ve wondered how it affects their carbon footprint.

Ryan Kellman/NPR


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Ryan Kellman/NPR

Climate change is affecting our food, and our food is affecting the climate. NPR is dedicating a week to stories and conversations about the search for solutions.

There’s a whiteboard on the refrigerator in the du Plessises’ kitchen that the couple uses to plan dinners for the week — what to make and who will do the cooking. But with two young children, full-time jobs and the nearest supermarket 20 minutes away, figuring out what to eat sometimes feels like a chore.

To lighten the load, Micaeli and Gerhard du Plessis regularly use a grocery delivery service. They’ve also tried prepackaged meal kits and they get takeout delivered to their suburban Washington, D.C., home about once a week.

Advertisement

“Obviously, we’d rather be able to go out and buy fresh stuff every day, but that’s not realistic right now,” Micaeli says, as she holds her youngest, Eva, in a baby sling and unpacks boxes that have just arrived by Instacart. “With two little kids … at Costco, it’s just a really unpleasant experience. So I’d much prefer to pay someone a few extra dollars to just deliver it for us.”

America’s appetite for online grocery sales soared more than 50% during the COVID-19 pandemic, from $62 billion in 2019 to $96 billion in 2020, according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. One in five consumers now has groceries delivered to their door at least once a month. By 2029, Statista estimates, the market will be worth $455 billion.

Meanwhile, there’s been a steep increase in demand for restaurant takeout via such services as DoorDash and Uber Eats. Meal kits like HelloFresh and Home Chef, which come with premeasured ingredients, are also experiencing strong growth.

An Uber Eats delivery courier rides an electric bicycle through the Park Slope neighborhood of the Brooklyn borough of New York.

An Uber Eats delivery courier rides an electric bicycle through the Park Slope neighborhood of the Brooklyn borough of New York.

Amir Hamja/Bloomberg via Getty Images


hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

Amir Hamja/Bloomberg via Getty Images

At the same time, food production and transportation make up as much as one-third of a typical U.S. household’s annual contribution to climate change-inducing emissions. The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates that 30% of food produced in the U.S. is wasted. And once in landfills, rotting food creates methane — a potent gas that heats the Earth. So, changing consumer behavior to minimize waste and reduce transportation could have a significant impact on the overall pollution that is fueling climate change.

Advertisement

“It’s crossed my mind,” Micaeli says about the environmental impact. “Unfortunately, it’s one of those things like Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. It’s like we have to meet our basic needs before we can be concerned about things like that.”

Gerhard du Plessis grabs a dinner plate while preparing to eat the Thai food he ordered for delivery.

Gerhard du Plessis grabs a dinner plate while preparing to eat the Thai food he ordered for delivery.

Ryan Kellman/NPR


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Ryan Kellman/NPR

In 2022, researchers from the University of Michigan and Ford Motor Co. modeled a single 36-item grocery cart to compare greenhouse emissions from an e-commerce grocery delivery and a traditional trip to the store to get the same items. Gregory Keoleian and colleagues at the university’s Center for Sustainable Systems found that using an electric vehicle to pick up groceries could cut emissions by as much as half, compared to a gas-powered vehicle.

They also found that home delivery could be an even better option. That’s because with a delivery vehicle, orders are often clustered, with a driver dropping off not just your groceries, but also hitting neighbors during the same run. “Delivery is actually going to be more efficient in general than driving yourself in a gasoline SUV to the store to pick up your groceries,” Keoleian says.

After waving goodbye to the delivery person the du Plessises children stand outside with their parents.

After waving goodbye to the delivery person, the du Plessises’ children wait outside with their parents.

Ryan Kellman/NPR

Advertisement


hide caption

toggle caption

Ryan Kellman/NPR

Advertisement

Meal kits versus cooking from scratch

In Sonora, Calif., Scott Jones, his wife and elderly father have made extensive use of HelloFresh. One of the company’s meal kits that is designed to feed two people works out “absolutely perfect [with] very little waste” for the three of them, he says. He’s also impressed with the packaging, much of which is compostable or recyclable.

Still, he’s a bit worried about the size of the carbon footprint such meal kits might produce, a concern echoed by the du Plessis family.

“I think the worst would probably be the meal kits,” Micaeli says. “Yeah, with all that packaging,” her husband, Gerhard, agrees.

In fact, a 2019 study found that, comparatively, meal kits could be one of the best options for lower greenhouse gas emissions. Shelie Miller and a group of researchers from the University of Michigan’s School for Environment and Sustainability compared the carbon footprint of meal kits with the same recipes sourced from a grocery store. She and her colleagues looked at emissions for each meal caused by food waste and packaging, and the supply chain structure.

The meal kits “did have more packaging overall and more impact associated with that packaging,” Miller says. “But what we really saw was that the meal kits had more efficient use of food.”

Advertisement

On average, the greenhouse gas emissions for a meal made with ingredients purchased at a grocery store are 33% higher than a comparable prepackaged kit, the study found.

The du Plessises sit down for dinner, Thai food, which they had delivered.

The du Plessises sit down to eat the Thai food they had delivered for dinner.

Ryan Kellman/NPR


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Ryan Kellman/NPR

The reason? When we cook from scratch, we tend to buy more ingredients than we need. Some of that goes to waste, Miller says. And leftovers get shoved to the back of the refrigerator and forgotten.

Case in point: At the du Plessis household, Gerhard says finishing up leftovers is a “50-50” proposition. “If you want to look in the fridge, there’s just Tupperware full of leftovers from last night and the night before” that might never get eaten, he says.

But shopping at a farmers market can help offset the carbon footprint of cooking from scratch, says Jury Gualandris, a professor at Western University’s Ivey Business School in Ontario, Canada, who studies food waste in supply chains. In one research paper, he and co-author Sourabh Jain consider the sustainability of individual consumer choices at a supermarket or farmers market compared to those made by a meal kit provider.

Advertisement

“When you cook your own meal, if you do it by sourcing materials that are grown locally, then you will cut the carbon footprint by a substantial amount …” Gualandris says.

Zelda leans in for help with a bite from her father.

Zelda leans in for help with a bite from her father.

Ryan Kellman/NPR


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Ryan Kellman/NPR

E-bikes, drones and robots deliver a smaller carbon footprint

When it comes to delivery services like DoorDash, Uber Eats and Grubhub, Gerhard du Plessis theorizes that “because this guy’s literally delivering two burgers and like two sodas,” such options would have a big footprint. “For the volume of food compared to the amount of carbon emitted, yeah, the equation doesn’t quite add up.”

Unlike grocery deliveries, it’s difficult to coordinate multiple drop-offs in a single vehicle, according to William Rose, an associate professor of supply chain management at Iowa State University.

A driver typically picks up an order quickly and, in the case of takeout food, ideally gets it to the customer while it’s still hot, Rose says. It becomes “impossible to cluster those deliveries,” he says — unless people who live near each other decide at the same time to order from the same restaurant or eateries within close proximity.

Advertisement

But there are ways to reduce the heavier carbon footprint even for this type of delivery.

E-bikes can save a lot on emissions and they are substantially cheaper to operate compared to automobiles. Keoleian says the study he worked on also looked at emerging technologies such as drones and sidewalk robots, finding that they could significantly reduce carbon emissions on small deliveries, such as restaurant takeout.

But he is quick to point out that the “last mile” of a delivery accounts for only about 10% of the greenhouse gases in the food supply chain. A much bigger factor is the type of food we eat, and “about a quarter to a third of the emissions are due to the food waste.”

Zelda receives a treat in the form of a temporary tattoo after dinner. Later, pictured at right, Micaeli loads dishes into the dishwasher.

Zelda gets a temporary tattoo as a treat after dinner. Later, pictured at right, Micaeli loads dishes into the dishwasher.

Ryan Kellman/NPR


hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

Ryan Kellman/NPR

Key takeaways for ordinary consumers

For any type of delivery, sedans are better than SUVs, which are better than pickup trucks, Keoleian says. Bundling a grocery run with other errands or the work commute is another good strategy to reduce your footprint.

Advertisement

But these options aren’t for everyone. Meal kits and food delivery can be more expensive and aren’t affordable for everyone. And yet, they can also be indispensable.

It wasn’t the pandemic but a serious accident that changed Halima Jenkins’ shopping habits. About a decade ago, she fell down a flight of stairs and now, she says, “I have days where I can’t drive. I have days where I can’t move.”

Her daughters don’t drive yet, and her husband doesn’t always have time to shop. So grocery delivery has become the norm in their Hyattsville, Md., home. The family also gets restaurant food delivered by DoorDash or Uber Eats once or twice a week.

“There are days where I just feel like existing is profoundly difficult,” Jenkins says. “I’m happy to just have something delivered depending on how capable I am that day.”

So, what are the simple takeaways for ordinary consumers?

Advertisement

If meal kits fit your lifestyle, they may be the most climate-conscious choice. The packaging might put you off, but you’re less likely to waste food.

When it comes to groceries, delivery via a service like Instacart may be a better option for the environment compared to driving to the store, unless you can bundle grocery runs with your work commute or other errands.

Limiting restaurant takeout via DoorDash or Uber Eats also will help reduce your carbon footprint. But with these services, the mode of delivery makes a difference. In a busy city, where the driver uses an e-bike or electric car, the footprint of the service will be significantly less than a meal brought to you in a gasoline-powered vehicle.

News

US oil refiners gear up for comeback of Venezuelan crude

Published

on

US oil refiners gear up for comeback of Venezuelan crude

Unlock the White House Watch newsletter for free

US refiners are braced for a surge in Venezuelan crude that would make them early winners of President Donald Trump’s extraordinary plans for an energy-led regime change in Caracas.

Shares in America’s top refining groups jumped on Monday as traders bet their US Gulf Coast operations could snap up big volumes of Venezuelan heavy crude as Washington looks to ease sanctions and revive production.

Valero, the biggest US importer of Venezuelan crude, closed 9 per cent higher. Phillips 66 added 7 per cent and Marathon Petroleum 6 per cent. 

Advertisement

Some content could not load. Check your internet connection or browser settings.

“Our refineries in the Gulf Coast of the United States are the best in terms of refining the heavy crude,” said US secretary of state Marco Rubio on Sunday. “I think there will be tremendous demand and interest from private industry if given the space to do it.”

Trump this weekend touted the “tremendous amount of wealth” that could be generated by American oil companies returning to Venezuela’s oil sector after US forces captured President Nicolás Maduro and transported him to the US to face trial on drug-trafficking charges. 

That has sparked a burst of interest among energy investors keen to return to Venezuela — home to the biggest oil reserves in the world — decades after expropriations by Caracas led most to abandon the country. 

A flurry of executives was expected to arrive in Miami on Tuesday, where US energy secretary Chris Wright will pitch the benefits of channelling billions of dollars into reviving Venezuelan oil output, which has fallen from 3.7mn barrels a day in 1970 to less than 1mn b/d today as a result of chronic mismanagement, corruption and sanctions. 

Advertisement

While any investment by US companies in rejuvenating Venezuelan oil production could take time, Gulf Coast refiners are well positioned to hoover up crude shipments as soon as sanctions are eased and more import permits are granted, something analysts say could happen quickly. 

Some content could not load. Check your internet connection or browser settings.

“Near-term, Gulf Coast refiners could be among the biggest winners of shifts that could occur here,” said Dylan White, principal analyst for North American crude markets at consultancy Wood Mackenzie. 

“The investment side of the coin in Venezuela is much more slow moving. It’s turning a very slow ship and it involves high-level decisions from a number of companies,” he said. “[But] sanctions policy changing in the US could change the economic benefits for US Gulf Coast refiners tomorrow.”

American refiners and traders import about 100,000-200,000 b/d of Venezuelan crude, down from 1.4mn b/d in 1997. Under current US sanctions, Chevron is the only American producer allowed to operate in the country and imports of Venezuelan crude are heavily restricted.

As much as 80 per cent of Venezuelan exports had been bound for China before the US imposed a naval embargo last month. Much of that could be quickly rerouted to the US if sanctions were lifted.

Advertisement

“The natural proximal home for a lot of those Venezuelan heavy barrels would be the refining complex of the US Gulf Coast,” said Clayton Seigle, senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, adding that the fact that the facilities were equipped to process Venezuelan heavy oil could explain “some of the short-term stock market reactions that we observed”.

Valero, Philips 66 and Marathon did not respond to requests for comment on their plans.

US refineries were largely set up before the shale revolution made America the world’s biggest oil producer. Almost 70 per cent of US refining capacity is designed primarily to handle the heavy grades common in Venezuela, Canada and Mexico rather than the light, sweet variety found in Texas oilfields, according to the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers.

Consultancy S&P Global Energy estimates that from 1990 to 2010, US refiners spent about $100bn on heavy crude processing capabilities, just before the fracking boom sent American production soaring.

“This finally gets some of the [return on investment] back,” said Debnil Chowdhury, Americas head of refining and marketing at S&P, of the potential for a return to significant imports of Venezuelan heavy oil.

Advertisement

“We had a system that was kind of running de-optimised for the last 10-15 years. And this allows it to get a little bit closer to what it was designed for — which means slightly higher yields, higher margins.

“You get to basically use your asset more how it was designed because you’re getting the feedstock it was designed for.”

Data visualisation by Eva Xiao in New York

Continue Reading

News

Maduro seized, norms tested: Security Council divided as Venezuela crisis deepens

Published

on

Maduro seized, norms tested: Security Council divided as Venezuela crisis deepens

Why it matters: Council members are split over whether Washington’s move upholds accountability – or undermines a foundational principle of international order.  

Some delegations argue the action was exceptional and justified; others warn it risks normalising unilateral force and eroding state sovereignty.

Setting the tone, the UN Secretary-General cautioned that international peace and security rest on all Member States adhering to the UN Charter – language that framed a debate likely to expose deep and lasting divisions inside the chamber in New York – all as the Venezuelan leader appeared in a downtown federal courtroom just a few miles away.

US Ambassador Michael Waltz addresses the Security Council.

US: Law-enforcement operation, not war

The United States rejected characterisations of its actions as military aggression, describing the operation as a targeted law enforcement measure facilitated by the military to arrest an indicted fugitive.

Advertisement

Ambassador Michael Waltz said:

  • Nicolás Maduro is not a legitimate head of State following disputed 2024 elections.
  • Saturday’s operation was necessary to combat narcotics trafficking and transnational organised crime threatening US and regional security.
  • Historical precedents exist, including the 1989 arrest of Panama’s former leader Manuel Noriega.

“There is no war against Venezuela or its people. We are not occupying a country,” he said. “This was a law-enforcement operation in furtherance of lawful indictments that have existed for decades.”

Venezuelan Ambassador Samuel Moncada addresses the Security Council meeting.

Venezuelan Ambassador Samuel Moncada addresses the Security Council.

Venezuela: Sovereignty violated; a dangerous precedent

Venezuelan Ambassador Samuel Moncada described his country as the target of an illegitimate armed attack lacking any legal justification, accusing the US of bombing Venezuelan territory, the loss of civilian and military lives, and the “kidnapping” of President Nicolás Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores.

“We cannot ignore a central element of this US aggression,” he said. “Venezuela is the victim of these attacks because of its natural resources.”

Calling on the Council to act under its Charter mandate, he urged that:

  • The US be required to respect the immunities of the president and his wife and ensure their immediate release and safe return;
  • The use of force against Venezuela be clearly and unequivocally condemned;
  • The principle of non-acquisition of territory or resources by force be reaffirmed; and
  • Measures be adopted to de-escalate tensions, protect civilians and restore respect for international law.

Article 2 of the UN Charter in a nutshell

The ground rules for global cooperation 

Article 2 lays out the core principles that guide how countries work together under the United Nations. Here’s what it means:

Advertisement
  • Equality for all nations: Every Member State, big or small, is treated as an equal.
  • Keep your promises: Countries must honour the commitments they made when joining the UN.
  • Peaceful problem-solving: Disputes should be settled without violence, to protect peace and justice.
  • No force or threats: Nations must not use force or threaten others’ independence or territory.
  • Support the UN’s actions: Members should help the UN when it acts to maintain peace—and never assist those opposing it.
  • Influence beyond membership: Even non-member States should follow these principles when peace and security are at stake.
  • Hands off domestic affairs: The UN cannot interfere in a country’s internal matters – except when enforcing peace under Chapter VII, which deals with actions to preserve international peace and security.

Read more about the UN Charter here.

Concern over use of force

Several Council members and others invited to take part expressed deep concern over the US military action, grounding their positions firmly in the UN Charter.

Colombia, Brazil, Mexico, Chile and Panama, underscored their region’s long-standing declaration as a zone of peace and warned that unilateral military action risked destabilising the Western hemisphere and aggravating displacement flows.

  • Colombia, in its first intervention as an elected Council member, rejected “any unilateral use of force” and cautioned that civilians invariably pay the highest price.
  • Brazil said the bombing and seizure of a head of State crossed an “unacceptable line,” warning of the erosion of multilateralism.
  • Mexico stressed that externally imposed regime change violates international law regardless of political disagreements.

Ambassadors also cited a worrying human rights situation inside Venezuela and the suffering of civilians, highlighting the need to ensure compliance with international law:

  • The United Kingdom highlighted years of suffering endured by Venezuelans – poverty, repression and mass displacement – while underscoring that respect for the UN Charter and the rule of law is essential for global peace and security.
  • Denmark and France acknowledged the imperative to combat organised crime and protect human rights – but warned that counter-narcotics efforts and accountability must be pursued through lawful, multilateral means.
A wide view of the United Nations Security Council meeting discussing threats to international peace and security, specifically regarding the situation in Venezuela.

A wide view of the Security Council meeting on the situation in Venezuela.

Regional voices backing US action

A smaller group of countries from the region took a different view.

  • Argentina praised the US operation as a decisive step against narcotics trafficking and terrorism, arguing that the operation and Mr. Maduro’s removal could open a path toward restoring democracy, the rule of law and human rights in Venezuela.
  • Paraguay also welcomed Mr. Maduro’s removal, calling for the immediate restoration of democratic institutions and the release of political prisoners, while urging that the transition proceed through democratic means.

Charter credibility at stake

Russia and China delivered some of the strongest criticism, characterising the US action as armed aggression and warning against the normalisation of unilateral force.

This position was echoed by countries beyond the Americas – including South Africa, Pakistan, Iran and Uganda – which warned the selective application of international law risks undermining the entire collective security system.

Representatives of Moscow and Beijing called for the immediate release of President Maduro and stressed the inviolability of head-of-State immunity under international law, framing the situation as a test of whether Charter principles apply equally to all States.

Advertisement
Broadcast of the Security Council meeting regarding the situation in Venezuela.
Continue Reading

News

Video: Welcome to Rennie Harris’s Dance Floor

Published

on

Video: Welcome to Rennie Harris’s Dance Floor

new video loaded: Welcome to Rennie Harris’s Dance Floor

The acclaimed hip-hop choreographer Rennie Harris’s production “American Street Dancer” brought Detroit Jit, Chicago Footwork and Philly GQ to the stage. We invited cast members to showcase the three street dance styles.

By Chevaz Clarke and Vincent Tullo

January 5, 2026

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending