Like an estimated two-thirds of the world’s population, I don’t digest lactose well, which makes the occasional latte an especially pricey proposition. So it was a pleasant surprise when, shortly after moving to San Francisco, I ordered a drink at Blue Bottle Coffee and didn’t have to ask—or pay extra—for a milk alternative. Since 2022, the once Oakland-based, now Nestlé-owned cafe chain has defaulted to oat milk, both to cut carbon emissions and because lots of its affluent-tending customers were already choosing it as their go-to.

Plant-based milks, a multibillion-dollar global market, aren’t just good for the lactose intolerant: They’re also better for the climate. Dairy cows belch a lot of methane, a greenhouse gas 25 times more potent than carbon dioxide; they contribute at least 7 percent of US methane output, the equivalent emissions of 10 million cars. Cattle need a lot of room to graze, too: Plant-based milks use about a tenth as much land to produce the same quantity of milk. And it takes almost a thousand gallons of water to manufacture a gallon of dairy milk—four times the water cost of alt-milk from oats or soy.

But if climate concerns push us toward the alt-milk aisle, dairy still has price on its side. Even though plant-based milks are generally much less resource-intensive, they’re often more expensive. Walk into any Starbucks, and you’ll likely pay around 70 cents extra for nondairy options.

. Dairy’s affordability edge, explains María Mascaraque, an analyst at market research firm Euromonitor International, relies on the industry’s ability to produce “at larger volumes, which drives down the cost per carton.” American demand for milk alternatives, though expected to grow by 10 percent a year through 2030, can’t beat those economies of scale. (Globally, alt-milks aren’t new on the scene—coconut milk is even mentioned in the Sanskrit epic Mahābhārata, which is thousands of years old.)

What else contributes to cow milk’s dominance? Dairy farmers are “political favorites,” says Daniel Sumner, a University of California, Davis, agricultural economist. In addition to support like the “Dairy Checkoff,” a joint government-industry program to promote milk products (including the “Got Milk?” campaign), they’ve long raked in direct subsidies currently worth around $1 billion a year.

Big Milk fights hard to maintain those benefits, spending more than $7 million a year on lobbying. That might help explain why the US Department of Agriculture has talked around the climate virtues of meat and dairy alternatives, refusing to factor sustainability into its dietary guidelines—and why it has featured content, such as a 2013 article by then–Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, trumpeting the dairy industry as “leading the way in sustainable innovation.”

But the USDA doesn’t directly support plant-based milk. It does subsidize some alt-milk ingredients—soybean producers, like dairy, net close to $1 billion a year on average, but that crop largely goes to feeding meat- and dairy-producing livestock and extracting oil. A 2021 report by industry analysts Mintec Limited and Frost Procurement Adventurer also notes that, while the inputs for dairy (such as cattle feed) for dairy are a little more expensive than typical plant-milk ingredients, plant alternatives face higher manufacturing costs. Alt-milk makers, Sumner says, may also have thinner profit margins: Their “strategy for growth is advertisement and promotion and publicity,” which isn’t cheap.

Starbucks, though, does benefit from economies of scale. In Europe, the company is slowly dropping premiums for alt-milks, a move it attributes to wanting to lower corporate emissions. “Market-level conditions allow us to move more quickly” than other companies, a spokesperson for the coffee giant told me, but didn’t say if or when the price drop would happen elsewhere.

In the United States, meanwhile, it’s a waiting game to see whether the government or corporations drive down alt-milk costs. Currently, Sumner says, plant-based milk producers operate under an assumption that “price isn’t the main thing” for their buyers—as long as enough privileged consumers will pay up, alt-milk can fill a premium niche. But it’s going to take a bigger market than that to make real progress in curbing emissions from food.

113 points

Need to keep the ag subsidies flowing so that rural areas keep voting conservative

permalink
report
reply
45 points
*
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points

The industry got too big and too reliant on subsidies. A reckoning will occur at some point, it’s just a matter of whether it’s announced ahead of time or surprises everyone.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points
*
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

“It’s not a good time right now” - the party in power at the time

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

Too big and too reliant on subsidies is a feature, not a bug. You want your farmers producing a fairly large surplus most of the time, because the harm resulting from a major food shortage is catastrophic. A widespread drought, disease, natural disaster, crop failure, or other shortage needs to be made up with other foodstuffs.

Subsidization incentivizes production even when market rates fall below profitability, which is what happens when production is significantly greater than actual demand.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Sorry, but that’s horseshit.

Taking away dairy subsidies would drive up milk and milk product prices, pushing more people to buy alternatives instead. Any loss of employment in the dairy industry is balanced by new jobs in manufacturing plant milks and dairy alternatives. This isn’t people being replaced by robots, it’s cows being replaced by plants. You still need pretty much the same workforce to package and distribute it regardless.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

New Zealand and Australia virtually eliminated agricultural subsidies and their industries are doing just fine.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Only 1% of americans work in the primary sector and that is not only comprised of farmers. Furthermore, there are more farming products than dairy, oats for oat milk have to be farmed somewhere as well.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

It’s not as if Democrats don’t also throw plenty of bones to farmers.

Even if the farmers themselves are likely to be relatively conservative, they’re such a politically sympathetic group that no one wants to be seen as “going after hard-working real American farmers!”. Things like the Iowa caucuses playing a huge role in national politics don’t help either (although the Dems have thankfully killed that).

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

It’s more of a matter of if food gets more expensive you’re more likely to be voted out of office

permalink
report
parent
reply
112 points

One thing nobody has commented on - how that article slips in a seemingly positive mention of Nestlé (they own the cafe that uses plant milks). That raised my eyebrows.

permalink
report
reply
29 points

I’m beginning to notice a handful of company ties to “make perfect the enemy of good” takes like this.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

It’s enough to drive one to schizophrenia. Everything is a hidden message

C̵̡̢̡̢̙̰̻̘̠͎̟͖̯̉͐̉̊̓̎̽͂͆̈̄̔͊͊̃̔̈́́̂̑̿̐̈́͑͛̆̾̈́́͘̚̕͝͝ơ̴̢̧̨̢̟̳̜͙̝͚̟̞͖̞̲͙͍̠͎̞̫͙̮̦̥̯̹̟̦̘̮̖͛͋̏̂̈́̽̓͊͂̃̀̒́͒̏͛̓̐̅́̽͛̇͆̀̽̋͋̋̈́̍́̓͑̚̕͝ͅn̸̡̧̨̛̛̛͍̺̤͎̮͕̟͇̞̙̞̯̤̭̠̥̰̹͍̮͍͙̫̮͉̫̻͖̜̭̦̱͚͎͖͖͓̹̽͛̊̂̓̿̄̏̊̀̀͌̓̽̏͂̒̂̌̄̄̀̊̆̏͑̈́̊̊͌͒͗̀̎̈́̚̕͝͝͠s̴̡͔̗͖̝͖̫̩̲̗̪̤̯̳̼̲̼̈́́̅̇̿̀̎͗́͗͒̀̿̌̎͐͛̆͗͆̿̓̈͗͌̌͒͒́̚̕̚̚͝ṵ̸̢̥̭͎͍̲̟͍̹͙̱̦̤̮̜̖͕̪̱̼̞̜̖̹̥̜͍̝̑̄̆̍̉͒̍̌̅̏̌̊̇͑̄̂̇͌́̿̈́̾͂̏̒͛̐̐̉̏̕̕̚̚͜͜͝͠͝͝ͅͅͅm̵̡̡̨̻̱̹̙̭͚͔̣̘͎̬̖̝̲͈̦̱͓̤̤̲̲̫̫̩͔̮̻̂͋̄̀͐̀̔̿̊̾̋͐̃͆̕̕͜ͅe̸̢̡͇̤͔͈̮̥͓̙͓̻͙̹̦͔̼͔͛̉́̇ͅͅ

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Always follow the money. Nobody does journalism for free.

permalink
report
parent
reply
57 points

The dairy lobby in the US is huge money. If you ever want to know why we’re making a seemingly stupid decision follow the money, look at the entrenched interests and read some history. We subsidize dairy farmers because we used to subsidize dairy farmers and they spent a bunch of their earnings lobbying for more subsidies.

permalink
report
reply
15 points

Granted, tobacco is far worse than dairy in its health outcomes, but imagine if big tobacco had somehow managed to get schools and government agencies to push their product onto children as a “health” product. Dairy is much like that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

there is a bit of a difference between milk and tobacco

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Really? I’ve been substituting tobacco for milk in my morning cereal every day, it’s been great to get away from dairy, finally.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

While that was true… this all happened when there wasn’t many other options frankly. The landscape is changing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
54 points

Except almonds. Almonds are terrible water wasters, and mostly grown in California where they can least afford the water.

permalink
report
reply
73 points

Still more efficient on resource utilization than animal agriculture. If you hate almond milk for that reason, you should want the dairy industry completely abolished.

permalink
report
parent
reply
44 points

Shit, you should want all animal agriculture banned.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

Based and correct.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I don’t want it gone but I don’t want it subsidized. I’m not planning on being vegan but I’m cutting out a ton of animal protein from my life. I make it a special thing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

So you’re saying almond milk drinkers could end up going to hell someday?

/s -The Good Place reference

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

I feel like trying to compare a water intensive crop grown in a place known for drought to crops that can be grown in many places where water is far more readily available is being a bit disingenuous. You’re not comparing apples to apples.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I mean, you could say that we shouldn’t be wasting resources on animal agriculture anywhere, but especially in the same places that don’t have enough water for crops.

Feeding food and giving water to other “food” will always be far less efficient than just providing a fraction of that water to plant-based foods. Animal agriculture is a waste.

permalink
report
parent
reply
59 points

Almond is the worst of the nut milks, but it’s STILL way better for the environment than dairy.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

What you get in stores is not even really almond milk. Real almond milk would be way too expensive to be competitive.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Exactly… Ughh I still fail to understand why almond milk is popular among vegans. It’s very expensive and doesn’t even taste that nice…

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Still better than dairy.

permalink
report
parent
reply
41 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
reply
28 points

TIL industries create the demand for these products, not consumers

permalink
report
parent
reply
30 points

I know you are joking but with how dairy lobbies get subsidies from the gov they kind of are making their own demand.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Unlike plant milk made from say soy or almonds. Those get no subsidies at all. Nope.

permalink
report
parent
reply
21 points

The propaganda for milk (that’s still going) certainly had a big role to play.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*

I cannot help but be reminded of the games that Big Tobacco (and Big Fossil) played pre-90s, all through the 90s, most mostly lost. It used to be “what are you non-smokers complaining about? It’s not that bad, etc…” pre-90s. Then, finally most indoor smoking got banned, even in bars. Then the fight moved to “but second hand smoke is not that bad, etc…”

Used to be there were tons of smokers in the United States. Now there are far less. I imagine dairy will go through a similar cycle…with the same efforts to distract and distort - even with a crisis of many related chronic diseases - see the “but almonds use so much water!” nonsense that is almost surely an industry placement.

For another comparison to tobacco, I had many, many family members that worked in health care. Most places in health care allowed smoking, nearly everywhere, at one point. If you see what constitutes “food” and “nutrition” in hospitals, it is easy to draw comparisons. It is almost like they could not care less if you get sick and stay sick, since there is no money in prevention.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

People hawk on manufactured consent until it’s inconvenient to the point

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

it’s true! did you just discover bernays?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Sorry but you got two cows, so you’re obviously a paid shill for big dairy /s

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

individualism

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Idk if it’s delicious. It’s good. Baileys is delicious. Hot chocolate is delicious. A cold glass of milk? Can’t say that craving comes up for me all that often.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Yes whole milk is good. Work buys 1% and it tastes like watered down milk.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points
*

I wouldn’t say it’s delicious… it’s meh-lk

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 11K

    Posts

  • 332K

    Comments