Graciela Bolanos

CAS138-T
Robin Kramer
Spring 2017

All Taste, No Waste

Eat your food! There are children starving in Africa. The completely outrageous

concept that we in The United States of America have anything to do with them, the poor

hungry African children. We actually, personally, cannot change the status of any of the

worlds poorthe ludicrous idea of the child packing her uneaten Brussels sprouts into a

USPS box, with the tagline, (for the poor kids, mom!) has been exploited by cartoonists

everywhere, as a joke to the old adage. However, is it such an outlandish idea that there

could be some common connection between the amount of food being wasted by developed

countries, and the want of the worlds poor? Even more surprising is the fact that, in order to

reach the poor kids, the USPS postage might not be as high as the childs mother expected:

in 2015, 44.2 million Americans lived in food insecure household, of which at least 13

million are youth (Feeding America). The knowledge that this problem is a domestic one,

that it doesnt pertain to far-away, exotic locales, makes the link even stronger. Surely there

must be a link between the 133 billion pounds of produce wasted per year (30-40% of the

food supply) (USDA) and the precarious status of these food insecure households?

Throughout this essay, I will be focusing on the role of the All-You-Can-Eat dining

options as a principal source of food waste on college campuses, and putting forward my

proposal for the adoption of trayless dining on campuses nationwide as the best solution.

The concept of food insecurity refers to the limited or uncertain availability of

nutritionally adequate and safe foods or limited or uncertain ability to acquire acceptable
[Type here]

foods in socially acceptable ways (Andersen). While national trends in food security are

relatively easy to analyze and target (with food stamps, soup kitchens and social projects),

obtaining data for college campuses has been a tricky matter especially since students in

the United States are traditionally a low-income segment of the population, used to subsisting

on ramen and energy drinks. However, a 2016 study conducted by James Dubick (National

Student Campaign Against Hunger and Homelessness), Brandon Mathews (College and

University Food Bank Alliance) and Clare Cady (Ibid.), reported that 48% of college

students had experienced food insecurity in the last thirty days (Dubick).

The issue of data collection on food insecurity on college campuses is further

obscured by the fact that universities use All-You-Can-Eat dining facilities as a way to tackle

food insecurity on campusfollowing the flawed logic that if larger quantities of food are

available, then less students are facing hunger issues. Of course, this is not the case, as the

majority of college campuses report both AYCE buffets and food insecurity issues, which

sheds light on the failure of the system to cope with the needs of the student population.

Other problems associated with AYCE dining buffets include increased BMI

(Wansink), electricity and water waste, and high costs for students. At Penn State University,

for example, the $4,500 meal plan (PSU Food Services) is sometimes not enough for the

average freshman, who has to add funds to his/her account midway through the semester.

Nonetheless, while AYCE buffets cost is high, the real problem occurs at the other end of

the dining process: the amount of food waste that is discarded after a meal.

Food waste is actually the second largest component of municipal food waste sent to

landfillsapproximately 18% of waste stream (Turning Food Waste into Energy). Its
[Type here]

estimated that around 30 million tons of food waste are currently filling up landfills, which

takes up invaluable space and creates massive amounts of methanewhose warming

potential is approximately 21 times more of carbon dioxide (Ibid.). However, even with the

existence of compost bins in some college campuses, they are not mandatory: all the uneaten

food that doesnt get composted goes towards landfills. Therefore, this contributes to the

unnecessary clogging of landfills, as well as the amount of methane released by the pile.

Of course, while having All-You-Can-Eat commons is in itself problematic, the need

does arise to be able to cater to a wide array of dietary restrictions and preferences: vegan,

gluten-free, nut-free and dairy-free are just some of the allergens that can be avoided by the

traditional approach to mass buffet dining. The tricky part is to be able to make the practice

of AYCE dining sustainable, which is not currently happening.

A solution proposed in 2013 by the USDA was the U.S Food Waste Challenge, in

which it would provide a platform to assess and disseminate information about the best

practices to reduce, recover, and recycle food loss and waste (U.S Food Waste Challenge).

One of these practices included food waste reduction at a collegiate level, but the guidelines

werent clear. Furthermore, by the end of 2014, the joint U.S. Food Waste Challenge (EPA

plus USDA) boasted over 4,000 civilian participants, well surpassing its goal of 1,000

participants by 2020 (Ibid.). However, these 4,000 participants account merely for about

0.00125% of the total United States 2014 population (Appendix A) which isnt an

encouraging panorama. Even if we assume that only around 14.1% of the population belongs

to the college-aged segment (15-24), the numbers dont get much more hopeful: a mere

0.009% of the college-aged bracket subscribe to one of the principal state-backed initiatives
[Type here]

to curb food waste (Ibid.). So even when surpassing expectations, the USDAs challenge

still falls short of the need that exists.

Currently, the best solution being implemented compost is neither the most

environmentally effective nor the most cost-friendly. Intro the concept of trayless dining.

In the all-you-can-eat world of the dining commons, there is a high amount of food being

tossed out after the day, be it because it was prepared and not served, or simply because

your eyes are bigger than your stomach, so students overestimate their hunger and end up

with more food than they can consume. All this surplus usually ends up in mixed-use plastic

trash bags, to be taken to landfills or (if the university has a smart waste-management

program), to the compost pile. However, as was explored above, neither one of these

alternatives has proven to be a viable solution to the systemic problem we currently have.

Especially in places where food insecurity goes hand in hand with waste, the way to tackle

both issues is not to curb where the food goes after its wasted, but to apply the basics of

preventative medicine: dealing with the problem at its root. In this case, at the dining halls

getting rid of the tray.

Making do without the infamous cafeteria tray is revolutionary by todays

standardsgetting rid of an American staple, used throughout the years as the perfectly

compartmentalized vehicle for food to be taken from bar to table. However, "dining

facilities on campuses take up to five times more water, five times more energy, five

times more waste per square foot than the dorm (Curry), which is in itself a waste of

resources. Furthermore, ostensible research has demonstrated that the adoption of trayless

dining reduces food waste by up to 30% per person, per day on college campuses (The
[Type here]

Business and Cultural Acceptance of Trayless Dining). Not only that, but college campuses

which have already made the transition report significant reduction on energy and water

costs, as the trays dont have to be washed and cleaned (Ibid.).

Moreover, getting rid of the tray interrupts the loop of the Delbeouf Illusion, a theory

in food psychology which plays into analogous food-dish relationship: it suggests that the

larger the plate, the larger the serving size (Van Ittersum). This can be translated into

laymans terms as the eyes are larger than the stomach illusion: we tend to over-serve

when were serving ourselves into larger dishes. This applies to the ubiquitous dining tray as

well: if there is a larger surface area in which to place a larger quantity of dishes, there will

by association be a larger quantity of food to be consumed by the diner. Nonetheless, the

average human stomachs volumetric capacity is between 0.25 and 1.7 liters (Reference),

which amounts to a maximum of around 7 cups of food once filled. This filled doesnt

necessarily mean foodliquids count as well, and any gas that might find itself trapped in

the abdominal cavity. Furthermore, humans become sated much sooner than when reaching

maximum capacity, meaning that even though the food is on the tray, it will probably not get

eaten. This uneaten food ends upyou guessed it as municipal food waste. Getting rid of

trays would avoid the problem of diners serving themselves too much food, and therefore

throwing the food away.

However, some would ask, why not just eat the food on the plate? This would, of

course, increase the students BMI, which has already been on the rise for the last couple

decades (Peter), which would in turn make the students pile on the food in a vicious cycle of

overeating-overserving-wasting. Getting rid of the tray would be a step forward in the right
[Type here]

directionnot a panacea, but definitely better than the alternatives that are currently part of

the mainstream.

The questions still remain, though: would the students be on board with it? How hard

would it be to implement? And lastly, would it truly prove to have quantifiable benefits?

For the latter, a 2012 American University study of a 660-diner cohort found out that,

when trays were removed randomly for either lunch or dinner periods, the students reduced

food waste by 32% and dish usage by 27% (Quantifying the Impact of Going Trayless in a

University Dining). These results have been replicated with mostly stellar results across the

board, with Pennsylvanias Williams College recording savings of up to 14,000 gallons of

water in a year when donning their trays (Underwood), and Rochester Institute of

Technology even reported significant savings in the cost of food (around 10%) when the

initiative was implemented (Ibid.).

As for the first and second questionsmost of these trayless initiatives and studies

were started and carried out by students, which reflects the general stance of the younger

generation on waste and conservation. Informal polling conducted around East, Pollock and

West dining commons at Penn State even revealed an overwhelming majority of students

who were willing to go on board with a Trayless Tuesday initiative, something of a

precursor to the full-fledged trayless reform.

The key for a smooth transition would be to ease into the new system in small

increments: Trayless Tuesday, or random unavailability of trays for either lunch or dinner

periods, accompanied by small signs with encouraging messages to not waste food by going

trayless, as well as explaining the benefits of doing so. Reflecting the savings brought upon
[Type here]

by the new system on the students bills, for example, would be an enormous incentivethe

transparency would be highly welcome, and the savings would be an easy, rewarding way of

thanking the students, or getting them on board with the problem.

Ultimately, going trayless boils down to the matter of food security again: the

inordinate amount of food waste being pumped into landfills is atrocious, but its especially

disheartening when observed in the light of the aforementioned food insecurity that many

people experience. If nothing is done to mitigate the risks associated with waste, however, it

could transcend the minority threshold and become a generalized global issue: severe food

shortages for the majority of the population. There is no need, however, to get that far: a little

effort now cuts the unpleasantness of any future needmeasures more extreme, that might

require forced action.