Business models for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from food loss and waste: Crates to transport tomatoes in Nigeria could reduce food loss and emissions by 36%.

Losses occur in transportation because tomatoes are placed in large woven baskets, and then stacked on top of one another for the journey to Lagos. Plastic crates can be stacked on top of one another without damaging the tomatoes at the bottom of stacks. Crates would also improve ventilation during transport. Losses can be reduced from 41% to 5% through use of crates. Furthermore, baskets are used on a one-time basis and must be replaced after each journey, and the crates are reusable

Business models for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from food loss and waste: Reducing milk spoilage in Kenya could reduce food loss and emissions by 10.5%.

Satellite coolers and farmer training programs reduce the amount of time milk is exposed to high temperatures and unhygienic conditions. Coolers can potentially reduce losses during storage by 6%, while extension programs that introduce proper handling practices can reduce losses by 4.5%. Although these measures require significant investment, they pay for themselves so expenses can be shared among groups of farmers at the cooperative level

Business models for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from food loss and waste: Improving cereal storage in Tanzania could reduce food loss and emissions by 14%

Farmer investment in hermetically sealed cereal storage bags can greatly reduce farmer losses. The bags protect cereals and other crops from insect infestation and other potential damages, reducing post-harvest loss from an average of 14% to less than 1%. Additionally, the bags enable farmers to store cereals, protecting them from volatile market prices and especially the low prices that occur immediately after harvest and allowing them to sell months later, when prices are higher

Climate change mitigation and food loss and waste reduction: Exploring the business case

The carbon footprint of food loss and waste (FLW) is estimated to be up to 3.49 gigatons of carbon dioxide equivalent (gtCO2e), representing up to 6–10% of total anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (HLPE 2014). Addressing FLW can reduce the emission intensity of the agricultural system; i.e. the number of tons of GHG emissions per ton of food consumed. This is critical, as global demand for food continues to rise. In addition to climate change mitigation, there are environmental, social, and economic benefits associated with reducing FLW. While development organizations have long promoted FLW measures, commercial uptake of FLW interventions lags in many developing countries. Supply chain analysis can identify opportunities for profitably reducing FLW. This study examines the business case for reducing FLW in three supply chains: dairy in Kenya, cereals in Tanzania, and tomatoes in Nigeria

Climate change mitigation and food loss and waste reduction: Exploring the business case

The carbon footprint of food loss and waste (FLW) is estimated to be up to 3.49 gigatons of carbon dioxide equivalent (gtCO2e), representing up to 6-10% of total anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. Reducing FLW can reduce the emission intensity of agricultural production. Moreover, many FLW reduction measures are profitable thanks to increased revenues. This study examines the business case for reducing FLW by examining three supply chains in detail: tomatoes in Nigeria, dairy in Kenya, and cereals in Tanzania. The cases reveal key strategies involving enabling environment, credit, business promotion that should inform other efforts to reduce FLW at scale. Additional research is needed to assess social justice and equity and to focus on cases that may directly benefit women

Reducing FLW: Developing the investment case

Meeting on food loss and waste as a climate change mitigation strategy November 14, 2018 Hosted by CCAFS Low Emissions Development as part of its Learning Platform on Low Emission Option

Walking And The Role Of Speed In The Perception Of Time To Contact

Many analyses of time-to-contact (TTC) emphasize that retinal information, independent of distal distance and speed, is used to compute TTC (e.g., Tau). However, our research indicates that speed information is also used and that TTC judgments are influenced by extra-retinal self-motion information. A stereo HMD and a wide-area tracking system were used to present TTC stimuli in an immersive virtual environment. In Experiment 1, stimulus approach rate was independent of observer motion. TTC judgments were made by nine naïve observers, while walking and while standing, for object speeds that bracketed standard walking speed (∼ 0.5, 1, and 2 m/s). Displays lasted 3.5 s, with TTC varying from 4 to 6.5 s from onset. The visual environment was untextured, so that there was no visual information specifying the speed of self-motion. When standing, TTC judgments were fairly accurate (mean error = +169 ms), but were earlier for slow objects (49 ms) and later for fast (288 ms). This influence of object speed despite equivalence of Tau is consistent with a misperception of object speed (poorer speed differentiation than distance differentiation). When walking, all TTC estimates were earlier (M = −186 ms), and the differential between slow (−393 ms) and fast (25 ms) objects was increased (p \u3c .05). The increased effect of perceived object speed might be a consequence of a greater misperception of speed. Extra-retinal information specifying self-motion speed might substitute for object speed. In Experiment 2, we studied TTC judgments while walking toward objects whose position was defined in absolute space, so that true TTC was a collision between the motion of the object and the observer. Stimuli were matched in initial retinal angle and approximate TTC, and drifted at varying rates. TTC judgments were again underestimated in all cases, but the estimates were most variable when the ratio of object approach speed to walking speed was most extreme