No Food Left Behind

The report evaluates the environmental impacts of replacing conventional hen feed with three alternatives: black soldier fly larvae (BSFL) meal, processed food waste feed, and bakery by-product meal. While bakery meal is the only option that does not increase overall environmental impacts, BSFL and food waste feed show significant benefits in reducing land use. The study highlights a critical trade-off where novel ingredients often increase greenhouse gas emissions and water consumption due to processing energy, though they can reduce the pressure to convert native habitats like the Northern Great Plains into commodity cropland.

• Bakery by-product meal is the most environmentally viable of the three tested alternatives, as it is the only one that does not lead to an overall increase in potential environmental impacts and is roughly equivalent to the baseline diet regarding water consumption and GHG emissions.
• Black soldier fly larvae (BSFL) meal and processed food waste feed perform poorly compared to baseline diets in terms of water consumption and global warming potential (GWP), primarily due to the energy required for processing.
• Incorporating food-waste ingredients can significantly reduce land use by decreasing the reliance on soybean meal and animal/vegetable fats, potentially saving between 206,000 and 269,000 hectares annually if diversion from landfills increases by 75%.
• The use of renewable solar power for processing food-waste-based ingredients can reduce the carbon footprint of alternative diets by 0.1% for bakery meal (at 5% inclusion) up to 51% for BSFL (at 15% inclusion), though these diets still maintain a higher GWP than the baseline.
• Reducing the demand for commodity corn, soy, and fats through waste-to-feed pathways could mitigate land use change and the conversion of native habitats, specifically in the Northern Great Plains of the US.
• In the US, approximately 14.7 million tons of food waste are estimated to be viable for waste-to-feed pathways, as post-consumer contamination and feedstock viability limit the use of the total annual food waste generation (over 27.6 million tons).

APA

McBride, M., Loyola, C., Papadimitriou, C., & Patterson, P. (n.d.). No Food Left Behind. WWF International. https://www.worldwildlife.org/documents/328/2q8g6qmx4s_WWF_NoFoodIV_Waste_to_Feed_Pathways.pdf

Chicago

McBride, Monica, Cristobal Loyola, Christina Papadimitriou, and Paul Patterson. No Food Left Behind. WWF International, n.d. https://www.worldwildlife.org/documents/328/2q8g6qmx4s_WWF_NoFoodIV_Waste_to_Feed_Pathways.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=McBride |first1=Monica |last2=Loyola |first2=Cristobal |last3=Papadimitriou |first3=Christina |last4=Patterson |first4=Paul |title=No Food Left Behind |publisher=WWF International |url=https://www.worldwildlife.org/documents/328/2q8g6qmx4s_WWF_NoFoodIV_Waste_to_Feed_Pathways.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{mcbridendfood, author = {McBride, Monica and Loyola, Cristobal and Papadimitriou, Christina and Patterson, Paul}, title = {{No Food Left Behind}}, institution = {WWF International}, url = {https://www.worldwildlife.org/documents/328/2q8g6qmx4s_WWF_NoFoodIV_Waste_to_Feed_Pathways.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }