4 ms·
If you're cooking anything with meat or imported produce, you're still damaging the environment, regardless of where it's cooked. Also your leftovers need to be
by Klinky 6y ago
If you're cooking anything with meat or imported produce, you're still damaging the environment, regardless of where it's cooked. Also your leftovers need to be put into something(often plastic) and stored in a refrigerated or frozen environment(electric/carbon costs), then reheated(electric/carbon cost). If you get tired of eating the same thing after 3 days and the rest rots away in your fridge, you've just created a ton of waste, or if you think to yourself you're going to spend 3 hours doing weekly meal-prep, but then flake out and don't do it, you just wasted everything. Some people are just terrible chefs or do not have the energy for it after working 50 - 60 hours in the week.
Also you could make a case that large houses with nice kitchens also have environmental costs to build and maintain, and living in small apartments with communal kitchens or restaurants nearby is better.
- luckman212 6y agoYou make some thought provoking points, but there are a lot of "ifs" there. So, even a chance that some savings might be achieved by cooking staple foods at home once in a while seems worth considering. Most people end up leaving a lot on the table when eating out, and 100% of that food ends up in the trash / wasted.
- Klinky 6y agoIf you want to save money then cooking bulk foods at home might make sense, people just need to make sure they're really calculating the costs properly. If you want a balanced diet and varied menu, then it can be expensive and labor intensive. If you want to save the environment, then you should reconsider your whole diet. Reduce meat intake and make smaller meals with more environmentally conscious ingredients(likely more expensive). Regarding leftovers, plenty of people put restaurant leftovers in a container and take them home to eat later. The people who don't would likely waste food at home too.