The USDA Joins The World in Tackling Food Waste: Can Soylent Help?


Hi everyone! I came across an article that was published today that is talking about the major strides the USA is making in reducing food waste. I wanted to open up a discussion here about how Soylent can be a part of this type of movement if at all.

The link to the article is here.

My initial thoughts are that it’s really great to see a lot more mindfulness that the industry can practice; while almost none of this is currently being done, it’s obvious that many have been thinking about it and that a lot of different solutions already exist and are being talked about.

Soylent can come into the picture either as:

  1. A ‘niche’ product used only for those that are pharmacologically prescribed as needing to be on a liquid diet (less ideal),

  2. A mass-marketed product that holds appeal by coming in multiple flavors as a meal replacer (but not a replacer for one’s entire diet) (more ideal)

  3. A complete replacement for all foods (very ideal for many reasons but would never wash with the food industry and no one would be willing to consider the idea upon being immediately introduced to it).

Thoughts anyone? Either way … if Soylent is in the market in the USA / around the world in any capacity, it is helping to reduce food waste. Agree/Disagree?


I hope Soylent will also help reduce packaging waste alongside food waste. Each of these issues are as important to me as eating healthily.

To that end I’m hoping it will be supplied in large biodegradable or reusable packaging.

I remember one of Rob’s early Tweets pointing out the disproportional amount of food packaging we have to dispose of in our home lives so I hope he carries the idea of reducing packaging to the finial product.


No offense, but what the SOYLENT does that matter? There’s 8 million people dying from starvation every year and you care about food waste? What are you going to accomplish if you reduce food waste besides feeling like you’re a great dude? Yeah, that’s a bad issue, but specting Soylent to reduce food waste is like expecting reduce population with bombs. Wouldn’t be better if you invest more in education so you actually develope some minimum level of consciousness? Damn, the US DoE have a budget of almost 70 BILLIONS a year. What the SOYLENT do you do with that money? Beers for frat parties? Again, no offense.


Lol, chill out abriel! Your prioritization of issues can not be justifiably expected of anyone but yourself.

But back to the topic at hand, the problem with Soylent as a solution to food waste is that the problem of food waste isn’t technological, it’s political. Soylent can’t afford an army of lobbyists or a regular commercial slot during primetime, so it’s basically powerless at solving world problems, at least for the time being. Maybe a hero will rise from amongst us and sacrifice themselves to the political system in exchange for getting something done, maybe not, but in either case it’s not our applicability to this problem that’s preventing us from making a real difference.


Oh and tell me, why it’s a political issue? Is the government meant to go to your house and spank you every time you don’t eat all your meal? I said you’re drinking your collage money in parties, not that it was the government DIRECT responsability to educate you. We’d be monkeys with iPods if it were for the interest of the government. Some (most) humans already are. And for the priorization thing: SOYLENT. I’m not saying that we should stupidly expect that within a year world’s problem will be over. But again my friend, aproaching food waste from your point of view is the most unaccuratly and subjective you can get. And that’s me being nice. First, do you really expect that people would actually give a shit about food waste, OR even Soylent? I mean, taking aside the actual reallity that only a 1% of population is going to even KNOW what Soylent is, how’d you expect to tell 400m people that they are a subnormal and morbid mass of meat with pseudobrains and that they need to stop eating and treating food the way they do becouse they are damaging the world…? are you SOYLENT kidding me right now? I mean, I don’t even understand how do you even think that solving the food waste is even ADDRESSABLE with this project, never think the possibility of actually solving it. I mean, sorry for my hostility man, but is exhasperating the way you people prioritaze issue. Next thing after adressing that 1% should be adress governments and ONG’s. But not with the stupid and… omg just STUPID system you have right now of “charity”. SOYLENT charity, people only give away money so they can feel better with themselves. Give a man a fish and he can eat for a day. Teach him how to use a rode and he can eat for the rest of his life. Lao Tzu. And you’re right in something, OUR applicability it’s nowhere near of making any kind of difference at all, in any sense. But it’s the SOYLENT way of thinking man. The way you care more about dispensing trash instead of being more conscious about the way you create it. How you address unemployment as it were an economic issue instead a social one and you try to solve it with more money (that you don’t have) instead of solving social issues like overpopulation. The way you just need more and more and more and more food, and it doesn’t matter people is dying from all kind of diseases from food, actually it’s better, becouse it’s more money to pharmaceuticals. Capitalism is as bad as comunism. Comunists were fast murderers, capitalists are slow torturers. I’m sorry, I’m talking to myself. Nevermind.


Gabriel, you forgot to stick “no offense” on the end of that one.

To add my thoughts on GodRaine’s last paragraph, sure, I think Soylent can prevent food waste. While I can’t speak for any waste inherent in the production of the ingredients, once Soylent is delivered to the consumer you have a long lasting product which is consumed as it is needed. As long as you only mix up what you intend to consume each meal, I can’t think of anything less wasteful than that. How much Soylent reduces food waste overall will of course depend on the size of it’s market share. I take your point Dunmatt. I can’t see how Soylent can change the status quo of western food production, that is, apart from just becoming more of a bigger player in the market.

I’ve been assuming we’re talking about food waste in developed nations.



Yes, you’re right, in the more technical and subjective way. I think you’re not thinking this throughly. Yes, Soylent can ideologically SOLVE the waste food issue in ALL the world, not just the US. Ideologically and theoretically. But let’s be more reallistic becouse the world is not just fairytales and ponys and wizards. For people to actually replace at least 50% ot their food (AT LEAST that’s the minimum for solving the waste) it’s going to take decades, probably generations, it’s going to take golbal crisis and at least a 100 years to people even replace 50% of their food all over the world. When people in the US start dying from hunger the way they do in other countries, that’s when they MAY embrace products like Soylent. And I don’t even think is going to be Soylent who’s going to give us that. It’s going to be probably a bigger companie, with more efective technology for develope. I mean, to actually be able to see things as you see it, you need to go generations ahead. That’s not my opinion, that’s statistics man. Soylent woudl have to deliver the most massive and agressive marketing campaing to actually be able to reduce that time at least for the next 10 or 20 years, but that’s not gonna happen unless they charge a lot of money for their product, wich eliminate completly the ultimate purpose of the product. And again, you’re not even giving me an argument. You’re saying that Soylent will reduce food waste becouse is an “exact” meal. Not too much, not too less? Your kinda forgetting a little variable on your ecuation man. People. For your argument to be actually viable people would have to consume Soylent as a replacement for at least 50% of their food and we’re back at the beginning. An please, PLEASE forgive me for my way of saying things. I BARELY can speak english and I’m doing a really big effort here to discuss this and deliver the most coherent argument I can write. I think people need to discuss EVERYTHING so ANYTHING can happen. I belive that if humans don’t discuss things they can’t go anywhere forward. I like good and logical arguments with a FULL picture of the issue and I try to find the best approach for every problem. I can respect that someone simply doesn’t think the way I do, but in that case, is just a waste of time talking as they’re not gonna change their minds nor give me a logical argument. If you have a more logical and complete and realistic argument, I please invite anybody to say it. I don’t mean any offense, just learning. If you simply don’t think the way I do and don’t want to discuss this, then forgive me for my stubborness.

@talvik That’s pretty amazing and funny. But as Dunmatt said, you guys need to prioritaze things a LITTLE more differemt, but not in the way you think. That’s actually the problem. What you “think” is pretty different from the reallity and the only reason you can’t think beyond is becouse you’re programmed for thinking straight as a homophobic. In fact, in terms of economy, capitalism is the homophobic dude in the group.


Gabriel it’s great you want to discuss these issues - discussing issues is so very important. But if you’re having a little trouble getting your point across you might like to try these suggestions:

Firstly, go back and very carefully read all the comments the rest of us have written.
Secondly, try and think of one single important point you wish to make that either adds to something one of us has said or argues against it.
Thirdly, write a reply on that one single point. You might like to use this simple template:

“I think that (assertion) because (reason)”

Hope this helps.


I honestly don’t know how to answer to you without being rude. I gave a very long argument. I from were I’m reading is perfect english. A lot of misspelling, but english. I’m between telling you to learn how to reason or if you’re actually serious about writing an argument of a single line long. Let’s just drop the issue shall we?


@Gabriel_Alejand Please be more mindful of the “Please be respectful and civil to one another” rule of Soylent discourse. I understand that some of these issues can be sensitive and elicit passionate responses, but that’s no excuse to be aggressively ordering other posters to fellate you.


Here’s a nice video outlining food waste issues.


This is vitriolic, unprofessional, and worst of all, hypocritical. If you’re going to cite site policy about being civil and unoffensive, don’t go out of your way to imply that he was asking other’s to ‘fellate’ him in the same sentence.

Seriously, I don’t agree with what he’s saying either, but at least I can convey it in a manner that doesn’t scream “I’m being an ass” while I do it. You’re not a forum troll, you’re one of the campaign’s figureheads. At least try not to put your head up your ass while you’re making your money.

Your responses are the single-most de-motivating thing about this product I’ve seen yet. Note the plural.


I think when managing folks on the internet, you’re dealing with different standards than other forums (if you will.)

I consider the response proportionate to the offense. He could have just deleted the offender entirely, but chose to approach it from a humorous tack. Given Gabriel’s self-professed lack of savvy with the English language, perhaps the humor of the statement might be lost, but most rational adults who can survive reading 2 sentences without choosing to take offense would get a chuckle out of that. At worst, Gabriel should get red-faced for about 2 seconds, laugh about it, adjust his passion levels, and everyone can move on.

Stop choosing to be offended by statements that aren’t intended to offend.


er… he sort of was. His posts were admin-edited for civility, look at the edit logs - pretty much everywhere with “SOYLENT” used to be something inappropriate, including “aggressive orders to fellate”, which I assume Julio phrased that way to avoid making the desist request just as bad as the problem.


@shadowhawkxx is correct, click the little edit pencil at the upper right of the original post to see the visual diff.

There is also almost a year gap between the replies, look at the dates in the upper right.


I wondered about that. “Why is this guy using ‘SOYLENT’ the way the Smurfs use ‘smurf’?” (I didn’t know admins could edit posts.)


In that case, I’m wrong and I apologize. Tagging @JulioMiles in the hope that he sees it, because if this is true it makes the reference completely different: rather than an inappropriate assumption, it’s a direct response to the comments made.

I don’t know how to view edit logs. shadowhawkxx - I appreciate the clarification.


I fully disagree. Apparently the poster actually did make the comments indicated, and I apologize for my mistake if that is true.

However, the internet is neither an excuse nor a reason to be any more or less civil, and if anything, a difference in power or authority imposes a greater responsibility to set a positive example.

You may think otherwise; I realize the opinion may not be popular, but human decency and respect is not something for which standards vary by medium, and you’ll not convince me otherwise.


Thank you. I had no idea there was a year gap, this showed up at the top of the feed when I loaded the page - I wouldn’t have bothered if I realized it was necro. Also didn’t know how to check the comment history, but as I’ve said elsewhere, I appreciate the clarification and apologize for my mistake.