Entomophagy, or insect consumption by humans, is not a novelty to anyone. Diets based on insects and arthropods are fully accepted in many countries and cultures, especially in South America, Asia or Africa. Even they are a real delicacy for some gourmets experts, for which they pay very high prices. There are markets for edible insects, at prohibitive prices, in cities such as New York, Tokyo, Mexico or Los Angeles, and some of the most famous international chefs include them in their famous recipes.
They do not have a single fault, nutritionally speaking. They are a balanced and healthy food, with high protein content, rich in essential amino acids. They are an important source of unsaturated fatty acids and chitin, besides of having vitamins and minerals beneficial for our body.
However, it is true that these ‘bugs’ have attracted the attention of the media, research institutions and members of food industry in recent months. Why now?
Experts say insects can provide a part of the necessary calories in countries where the consumption of some foods is limited. The Food and Agricultural Organization of United Nations (FAO) expects the world population will increase by 2050 in 9700 million people, about 24% people more than now, so there will be a greater need to supply food. Therefore, it could be a solution to help reducing the levels of hunger in the world.
On the other hand, agriculture and livestock, as we know them today, are primary activities that emit greenhouse gases. In comparison, insect could be produced with lower levels of greenhouse gas emissions and water consumption. Therefore, the incorporation of these new ingredients to our market list can also improve the situation of the planet in the climate change’s fight, as well as contributing to the circular economy process due to insects can feed with agrifood waste.
In addition to these reasons, on January 1st, Regulation (EU) 2215/2283 come into force, which includes insects within the category of ‘novel foods’, which is a big step to simplify the authorization process.
And, if eating insects have so many advantages, why are they not consumed regularly in Spain and in many other Western countries?
Because, in spite of legislation, there is an emotional and cultural rejection to include them in our plates. In other words, they make us feel sick!
This argument has been demonstrated by a pioneering experiment through blind tasting of different foods prepared with insects and monitored with neuroscientific tools, carried out in the context of GO_INSECT and ECIPA projects. These are two innovative initiatives related to the breeding of insects for food as an alternative and sustainable source of proteins. CARTIF takes part in the first one, a Supra-autonomic Operative Group, which has the financial support of the Spanish Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Food Supply.
This blind tasting has served to demonstrate that taste is not the reason why we do not choose insects for eating. The main reason is the appearance of them, knowing what they are, being aware that we are going to eat something disgusting for us.
How did the experiment carry out?
28 people participated in the tasting, which took place at the Veterinary School of the University of Zaragoza, while the electrodermal activity of us was recorded. Previously, we were warned products of the tasting could contain lactose, gluten, nuts, crustaceans and insects.
Participants tasted four dishes with insects in their composition, and a fifth dish without them, which served as base of comparison. In three of those that contained insects, they were processed and were not visible directly to the eye. In the fourth, insects were easily recognizable.
All these options were carefully elaborated and tested in advance in order to avoid mistakes in the evaluation. Bitbrain Company’s technology measured sensory responses, both when visualizing the food and when eating it. At the end, they evaluated with and individual survey the satisfaction to each elaboration.
And the results?
The non-conscious emotional response to the three first dishes, which have insects in their composition in a non-visible way, fell within the normal parameters to the tasting of the rest. That is, the fact that a plate contains insects does not influence negatively in the taste and is not detected at the physiological level either.
On the other hand, the emotional impact of the participants when we tasted the whole insect (small dry larvae of Tenebrio molitor or flour worm) was much higher than in the resto of the dishes. Even, the emotional impact was greater during the visualization than during the intake. That is to say, what produces that impact is the knowledge of knowing that what we have before us is an insect, not so much the consumption.
At a conscious level, the average score given to the dishes in which the insects were incorporated as flour was 7’6. Only one participant did not agree to taste the plate of the whole insect. Those who taste it marked a 5’9 of average grade.
After knowing that all the products we had tested contained insects, secured we would eat them again. Only one of the participants confirmed in the survey will not buy products that had been fed with insects.
So, at least, we should give them a chance, even if they are masked. More than 2 billion people already incorporate them into their diet, so a quarter of the world’s population cannot be wrong.
It is weekend. Dinner with friends at home and the dishwasher is damaged. After washing the dishes by hand, I set out a question: ‘what do you value most when buying a dishwasher?
This is one of the situations where it is clear that the dishwasher exists because there is a service that generates its demand. If there were not dishes to be cleaned, there would hardly be an element dedicated to its cleaning, which has influence in ‘liberating our time’. So it must be designed specifically to satisfy with guarantees and quality the purpose for which it was designed.
Some people will tell us that, for the new purchase, we should value the price (an economic product can be tempting for our pocket); while others will advise us to evaluate the latest trends in this regard (a ‘designer’ dishwasher can incorporate the last cleaning technology). However, are these options the only ones to consider for the purchase? In addition, there could be people who advise you to seek the incorporation of eco-design criteria in order to our choice incorporates recycled materials, for example. So, what will be the most important criterion?
All the above options are attractive, of course, but I must admit that if I were at dinner, my advice would be towards buying the most efficient dishwasher. Why? Let’s see. I am going to convince you:
You are going to live for a long time with this electrical appliance, which consumes energy and water, so the fact that consumption would be as low as possible is important, affects our pocket.
Furthermore, do you believe that a surprisingly low price ensures not means a reduction in robustness? Perhaps, paying a little more you ensure a longer life of the appliance (and cleaner dishes).
According to dictionaries, the term ‘efficiency’ implies the ‘ability to have someone or something to achieve a certain effect’. This definition, which seems timeless and absolute, is really a term that must change and adapt to the particular context of each moment in history, and the current moment is not trivial. Efficiency implies that this ‘effect to achieve’ brings together all needs that the current context commits ourselves to satisfy.
A dishwasher must be able to clean the dishes correctly, with low electricity and water consumption (critical points in today’s society) and with a reasonable shelf life for the appliance, which will ensure that the consumption of resources is sustainable.
And, what if we associate this simile with roads?
The road exists to cover society’s need to transport goods and people from point A to point B. Everyone, like the dishwasher, should want an efficient road.
The road, as infrastructures, has its own environmental impact (associated with its ray materials, its manufacturing processes, etc), but it also has an influence on the impact associated with the consumption of the vehicles that pass through it, the accident rate, comfort, the state of the vehicles, the connectivity of different zones… Therefore, it should not matter to invest more resources and efforts at the beginning if later a return is obtained and the overall balance is positive (both from the environmental point of view as economic).
A road in good condition (efficient) can reduce the consumption of vehicles that travel up to 5% (EAPA). As an infrastructures, the construction and conservation of a road for 30 years represents less than 1% of the CO2 emissions of the vehicles that pass through it (EAPA).
So, why is not the concept of efficiency on the road as obvious as it is in a household appliance?
In the case of the dishwasher, the user chooses and funds it, pays for water, electricity, detergent, salt, dishes or repairs… according to his judgment. However, in the case of roads, the Administration, whit all the constraints, which manages and decides the actions on infrastructures. In addition, the saving obtained in the correct management of the infrastructures, are visible in the medium-long term and the fuel savings are diluted in many small saving for drivers, difficult to quantify. This may be the reason why Administration does not perceive an immediate real benefit, or perhaps it is not too attractive considering its electoral and budgetary pressure. The money also comes from the user’s pocket.
It is necessary to help administrations, from all the sectors involved in road transport, to understand that we are in a long distance race, to help internalize the concept of efficiency, and to evaluate the problems considering the global set of transport system as a whole, and not evaluate individually the multiple independent subsystems that compose it.
The environmental variable is improved thanks to a good conservation of the roads and the economic variable too, from a global point of view and including all the agents involved.
Last July, EFSA published a protocol that sets out the strategy to follow for the collection of data that will be used for the development of a Scientific Opinion that establishes the maximum tolerable level of sugar intake. I know it could seem confusing, let me explain…
Tons of tweets and images often appear on social networks that show the amount of sugar that certain processed foods have. Associations such as sinazucar.org have been actively promoting it for some time. Thus, this topic is not new at all. The novelty is related to the publication by EFSA of a protocol that sets the strategy to follow in the collection of scientific data that will be carried out prior to the publication of the Scientific Opinion on the reference dietary level of intake of sugarsfor the European population that EFSA plans to publish.
This document will represent an update of the Scientific Opinion published in 2010 regarding reference dietary values for sugars, carbohydrates and fiber (EFSA NDA Panel, 2010a). With the data available up to 2010, there was no conclusive evidence linking an effect of sugars on micronutrient density, insulin response to glucose, body weight, type 2 diabetes or dental caries significant enough to establish limits of maximum tolerated intake, adequate intake or reference intake of sugars. After 2010, several organizations have published recommendations on the recommended intake of sugars; however, quite disparate among them. For example, the World Health Organization recommends reducing the consumption of free sugars in life. For both adults and children, the consumption of free sugars should be reduced to less than 10% of the total caloric intake. A reduction below 5% of the total caloric intake would produce additional health benefits. Now, EFSA intends to evaluate the scientific basis that has emerged from 2010 to the present and to check if there is enough new evidence to establish a reference dietary level.
This request to EFSA, which comes from the competent authorities in the field of nutrition and health of 5 European countries (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Switzerland), will not only respond to the need to update the existing evidence but also will constitute an act of consensus of terms referring to the sugars present in food. Currently, each one calls, labels and understands the sugar content of food at free will, which makes it difficult to study the literature, label food and establish conclusions about the cause-effect relationship and recommendations for the population. Some companies only express the total sugar content in the nutritional labeling of their food, others consider that what is really important is to know the content in “added” sugars, while others demand consensus to label and make recommendations about “free” sugars. Do you know the difference between the three terms?
Total sugars: all mono and disaccharides that are part of a food, whatever its origin.
Added sugars: all mono and disaccharides that are not part of the food naturally but have been added during processing, whether by the manufacturer, the cook or consumers.
Free sugars: all mono and disaccharides except those that naturally form part of whole fruits or vegetables (whether intact, dried or cooked).
That is to say, all the added sugars are free sugars but not vice versa. The key difference between added sugars and free sugars is that the free sugars also contemplate the sugars that are naturally present in honey, syrups, fruit juices and fruit juice concentrates; while the added sugars do not contemplate them. Sugars naturally occurring in whole fruits and vegetables are not included as free sugars since there is no evidence that they have an adverse effect on health. In other words, free sugars would be synonymous with total sugars in all foods except fruits and whole vegetables.
A practical case to help us clear up this mess, please! For example, the sugars naturally present in a carrot juice in brick would be considered as free sugars; while the sugars naturally present in baby carrots packed in a modified atmosphere ready to eat, would not be considered.
Currently in Europe, most companies label their sugars in the form of total sugars. The USA was the first country in 2016 to establish regulations to force the declaration of all added sugars in the labeling of all foods. On the other hand, the Canadian health agency recently published a document in which it proposes to label foods rich in sugars, saturated fats and sodium as “high food in …” In the case of sugars, Canadians propose this declaration to be included in all foods that contain free sugars (not only added), so that this rule also affects fruit and vegetable juices and purées; while only dairy and whole fruits and vegetables stay out of this mandatory declaration.
Needless to say that if this lack of consensus affects the good understanding among professionals and experts in nutrition, even more it will confuse consumers. So in addition to this task of matching key terms to establish recommendations for intake and common labeling standards, education and consumer communication campaigns on the interpretation of nutritional labeling of foods are also necessary.
From CARTIF, we are committed to the dissemination of consumer education on nutrition and food issues, so we will remain aware to the publication of the Scientific Opinion of EFSA and of course, we will inform you of its conclusions in a clear and understandable way.
More than a year ago, we invited you to think green and it has been almost two years since we presented the concept “re-naturing cities”. Time waits for no man and it is a great achievement for us to ascertain how these concepts, which we study theoretically, become projects.
For both concepts, the implementation is being carried out with the URBAN GreenUP project implementation. Coordinated by CARTIF, its objective is the development, application and replication of renaturing urban plans in a number of European and non-European cities with the aim of contributing to climate change mitigation, improving air quality and water management, as well as increasing the sustainability of our cities through innovative nature-based solutions. The urban renaturing methodology is going to be demonstrated in three front-runner cities, Valladolid (Spain), Liverpool (The UK) and Izmir (Turkey), with the purpose of becoming more liveable cities using nature. To achieve these objectives, the consortium is formed by 25 partners (now, friends) form 9 countries which involve 3 continents (Europe, South America and Asia).
But we should not be bothering ourselves with all these technical definitions, let us try to use our day-to-day language.
Why this project and its development is so important for the citizens of Valladolid?
… Because Santa María Street will no longer be “one of the pedestrian streets perpendicular to Santiago Street” to become the first street in Valladolid with a Nature-Based Solution installed, green covering shelters specifically. These infrastructures integrate specific vegetation in flat surfaces and their structural features allow provide water for plants, humidity for the ambient and shade for citizens. They contribute to the reduction of heat island effect and improve the well-being providing physical coverage for sun and rain and, moreover, they will allow that the green colour appears in a grey zone.
… Because the time before the bus appears in Plaza España will no longer be a moment of impatience (during which we cannot help feeling “when will the bus arrive!”) to become an instant in which we can feel comfortable seeing the green covering shelters installed that will serve as a support for local urban biodiversity.
… Because one of the main avenues of the city, with high traffic density, will incorporate green noise barriers, structures designed to allow passage of wind thus avoiding its fall and it will mobile characteristics. They will include innovative substrate and specific vegetal species in order to avoid the negative effect of traffic noise for our ears (even 15dB of reduction) to please the eye, improving the air we breathe indirectly.
… Because the widely held etymological theory about the name of Valladolid which suggests that it derives from the expression Vallis Tolitum (meaning “valley of waters”), will become “theoretical” more than ever. The city has suffered important floods over the years that honor the possible origin of its name, but the floodable park to be implemented at the entrance of Esgueva River will integrate several NBS to minimize flooding and allow water drainage when heavy rainfalls or extraordinary flooding episodes occur, in that they are becoming increasingly frequent due to climate change.
It will be in a 2-year time horizon when a total of 42 natured-based solutions will be implemented in several areas of the city, and all of them will contribute to transform Valladolid into a more liveable city and resilient to climate change.
For projects such as this, we are organising the “BY&FOR CITIZENS” conference on smart regeneration of cities and regions, with the collaboration of the Institute for Business Competitiveness of La Junta de Castilla y León. It will be held in Valladolid on September 20 and 21 and among the experts attending the conference are included Paul Nolan, the director of The Mersey Forest, and Ramón López, from the Spanish Climate Change Office, to present and moderate several sessions about integrating nature to create new city ecosystems .
As the psychologist Daniel Goleman says “Green is a process, not a status. We need to think of ‘green’ as a verb, not as an adjective”.
For some years, we have been listening to talking about smart cities, more sustainable environments… but, in some cases we do not know what kind of strategies could do our city to turn into one of them.
When we refer to Smart City, we talk about cities concerned with reducing energy consumption and emissions, cities that bring advances in information and communication technologies to their inhabitants and, ultimately, cities that seek improve the quality of life of its citizens taking advantage of many technological and non-technological solutions that are currently available in the market.
Although these solutions are available in the market, we have to wonder why these solutions are often not being applied. Sometimes, this is because of lack of funding; the least, of technical ignorance. But there is something in common when implementing this type of project; the difficulty of agreeing on all the agents involved in its execution. Citizens and experts, municipal agents and private companies, neighbourhood associations and users… all have to row in the same direction and work on the development of integral projects, instead of isolated solutions, in order to ensure cities of the future.
In CARTIF, we work to support European cities in this transition towards more intelligent and sustainable environments. Proof of this are the numerous projects that we are carrying out with this objective.
How can a city detect and analyse its needs and priorities? What technological solutions can be implemented to meet those needs? How a comprehensive project can be managed for the city? What business models or financial schemes can be applied? These are some of the issues which we address in this type of projects, and to answer them we work on methodologies that guide cities on the road towards their transformation into an Intelligent City.
One of the last lighthouse project in which CARTIF is working on is MAtchUP project (Maximizing the Upscaling and replication potential of high level urban transformation strategies), which has replicability as one of its main axes. When we look for solutions to satisfy the needs of our cities and their objectives, it is very important to have the experience of other European cities, where these solutions have already carried out. Knowing what has been the key to their success or how they have overcome certain barriers, is very useful information to achieve the replication of these solutions in other cities.
In MAtchUP, we not only work to ensure the success of the actions that are being carried out in its three demonstration cities: Valencia (Spain), Dresden (Germany) and Antalya (Turkey), but we work to ensure its future implementation in new scenarios: both within the same cities through the scaling of solutions in other areas of the city, and outside of them working on their replicability.
The actions can be framed in three fundamental pillars for urban regeneration: energy, mobility and information and communication technologies. These actions involve different agents, but above all, and fundamentally, involve citizens. They are the key factor of the new city model that promotes an integrating vision of all its agents. They create the city, live in it and enjoy it. And they are a primordial force that pushes the defined actions within the framework of the project.
MAtchUP continues the trajectory of demonstration projects at a city scale with which we have been working for years in CARTIF. But, unlike the previous ones, MAtchUP is not just a project for its lighthouse cities, but it delves much more into the work related to its follower cities; Herzliya (Israel), Ostend (Belgium), Skopje (Macedonia) and Kerava (Finland). In this way, the impact of the project will be much greater when working actively with seven cities, which will expand the useful and replicable results for all those cities that want to go further in their urban planning and in their transformation towards a more sustainable environment.
So, if we want to improve our cities, the best way is to take advantage of other experiences and replicating the successful solutions that have been carried out in other parts of the world. In CARTIF we want to collaborate with this dissemination of information and for this we have organized a conference in which smart cities will be the protagonists. BY & FOR CITIZENS will take place in Valladolid on September 20 and 21.
In this event, we will try to spread the experiences of a large panel of experts covering all aspects related to smart cities. We wait for you in Valladolid.
I try to go there every time I can, to the FASA-Delicias district, and it still amazes me that, at the end, we have been able to make a small part of Valladolid a better neighbourhoodfor the people living there.
Most times I don’t stop there, due to lack of time. But only going over there and seeing from the San Agustín School the tower with the photovoltaics or the new colours of the buildings –you may like them or not– makes me feel a feeling of gratification difficult to be described.
Same happens when I happen to see the buses of line 7, those electric, and I can’t help thinking that we have contributed, even a little, to make out of this city a more sustainable place.
This path started now more than 5 years ago, and there is still more than one year in front, but now we can already see in place all the interventions that we planned in some areas of this city. Something that seemed to be impossible now is a reality.
Sometimes I feel that most of the citizens are not familiarised with this. There are not that many that have heard about REMOURBAN, and some of those that have, sometimes confuse it. Honestly, it is not difficult to understand that it is not easy to see all there is behind from outside. It is yet sometimes difficult from inside.
Long story short, you should blame REMOURBAN for the new 45 electric vehicles that we have today in Valladolid. For the new fleet that Correos, the post delivery service, has deployed with less contaminant vehicles. For the new fast charging point in CENTROLID, the logistics distribution centre, and the new 63 charging points installed by the Municipality and Iberdrola to be publicly used.
For the 950 tons of CO2 that the families living in FASA (around 400 families) have started to reduce (this is the equivalent of planting almost 2000 new trees). For having their homes at 19ºC when they wake up after having the heating system switched off the whole night, while they used to wake up at less than 15ºC in some dwellings. And moreover, for this improvements being paid with the savings in their energy bills, without investing a cent.
For the 2 new electric buses that the Municipality of Valladolid has deployed, plus other three that they have incorporated due to the leverage effect of the two firsts. Two buses that run the whole city centre without emitting contaminant gases. And also, for the other two (also electric) vehicles shared among the personnel of the city council.
For the new city information platform that contains a big amount of data and models the mobility and energy behaviour of some areas of the city. Data that will allow identifying new strategies and policies to continue improving the city.
All in all, for the improvement in the air quality of the city, for reducing the heat island effect or for the new information to make more informed decisions in the future of our city.
Also, you should blame REMOURBAN for positioning Valladolid in the map of pioneering cities through its strategy to develop a more efficient, intelligent and sustainable city.
You should blame REMOURBAN for all these issues, and also, in CARTIF, we feel a bit responsible of all them.
But REMOURBAN is not the unique project that is working to make out of Valladolid a referent in sustainability and smart city. R2CITIES, CITyFiED or UrbanGreenUp should also blamed for this, through their efforts to renovate Cuatro de Marzo or Torrelago districts, making them more efficient, or to implement nature-based solutions in the city.
Something that we have learnt along this entire path is that there is still a big barrier that prevents that all these actions can be successfully replicated to other areas of the city or other cities. And this is the lack of contrasted and credible information about the benefits and implications of these projects.
We are, thus, working hard to fight against this barrier trying to achieve that all cities in Europe can learn from our successes and failures. And in CARTIF this has been our objective in the recent years, where we have started to export this knowledge to other cities as Palencia, Vitoria-Gasteiz, Valencia, Helsinki, Hamburg or Nantes.
And giving a step forward in this path, we have embraced the challenge to organise a conference that pretends that Valladolid shines a bit more in this “Hall of Fame” of the Smart and Sustainable Cities. By & For Citizens is going to take place in Valladolid on September 20-21.
A conference where are aiming at bringing all these experiences to cities, architects, engineers, urbanists, investors, public administrations and, beyond that, to the citizens, who are the key player on the city transformation. You can’t miss this unique opportunity!
