Ordering a hamburger sandwich just before boarding - because airplane food often doesn't taste like anything - will soon become a lot more difficult. Schiphol will not ban meat completely, but it does want to significantly reduce the current supply in order to save CO2 emissions. This almost seems like a classic case of the pot calling the kettle black. And besides, it is quite short-sighted.
The fact that meat consumption is under fire is not something that happened yesterday. But the smear is rearing its ugly head again, as it turns out. In addition to Schiphol, Saxion University of Applied Sciences also proudly announced earlier this month that it will no longer serve meat at the learning institution's events from 2025. In the generally down-to-earth Eastern Netherlands, meat consumption has apparently become just as much of an issue as in other parts of the country.
Schiphol is not going to ban meat completely, but wants to reduce the supply available to its operators to 40%. In other words, the other 60% of the protein supply must be of vegetable origin, De Telegraaf wrote last week.
Bluntly
Now this piece is not a plea for unbridled meat consumption, as is quickly assumed by a counter-narrative. That can never be a goal in itself, and B, meat is too much of a delicacy for that. But the fact that Schiphol - one of the three largest emitters in the Netherlands - wants to reduce the meat supply seems to me to be the wrong focus of the airport. Because that unfortunate position is really not due to the hamburger sandwiches that are eaten there. And moreover, the measure is short-sighted. Several studies have shown that meat and dairy can sometimes match the plant-based alternatives in terms of CO2 emissions. Not to mention the nutritional value. There is still a lot to be gained from using residual flows in animal feed, for example. If Schiphol really has great green intentions, it would have been bolder to do something that directly affects its own business.
Hybrid meat
Meanwhile, the agricultural sector is struggling with the persistent anti-meat policy at public and semi-public institutions. To passively watch as meat slowly but surely disappears from the social menu feels unfair. But pushing too hard against the pressure exerted by NGOs is often counterproductive. Making a plant-based switch is also risky for slaughterhouses. The string of major losses at Beyond Meat is living proof of this. Anyone who hadn't invested their money in this hip American startup a few years ago was a loser. We now know better. Dutch slaughterhouses often try, but sometimes go back on their strategy. This is because meat substitutes simply sell poorly due to poor palatability and the justified association that they are highly processed food. The trend now seems to be hybrid meat products, which is a kind of optimum between taste experience, nutritional value and emissions. In other words, a compromise between preserving cultural eating habits and minimal climatic impact.
Olympic menu
The supply of meat (and eggs) for the athletes was also significantly reduced at the Olympic Games, with France trying to make it a green event. Several athletes complained because they could not get their nutritional values from the plant-based alternatives. So meat still fits into a conscious diet. Provided you monitor the balance a bit yourself. And Schiphol and Saxion do not have to do this with good intentions in order to primarily meet their own environmental goals.
© DCA Market Intelligence. This market information is subject to copyright. It is not permitted to reproduce, distribute, disseminate or make the content available to third parties for compensation, in any form, without the express written permission of DCA Market Intelligence.