It is not uncommon to find a green potato chip in a bag of mostly golden yellow chips, but soon, all potato chips from Frito-Lay might be green. Not in color, but in the environmental impact of their manufacture.
Frito-Lay, a division of PepsiCo, is working to take its potato chip plant in Casa Grande, Arizona, completely or almost completely off the power grid and run it almost entirely on renewable fuels and recycled water. The company calls the concept Net zero, and, reports the New York Times, the project “has the backing of the highest levels of corporate executives at PepsiCo.”
Frito-Lay is embarking on an ambitious plan to change the way this factory operates, and in the process, create a new type of snack: the environmentally benign chip.
There are benefits besides the potential energy savings. Like many other large corporations, PepsiCo is striving to establish its green credentials as consumers become more focused on climate change. There are marketing opportunities, too. The company, for example, intends to advertise that its popular SunChips snacks are made using solar energy.
“We don’t know what the complete payoff for net zero is going to be,” said Indra K. Nooyi, PepsiCo’s chairman and chief executive. “If this works even to 50 or 60 percent of its potential, that is fantastic, and it’s so much better than what we already have.”
The Net Zero project includes a myriad of changes, some big and some small, ranging from installing solar panels and more-efficient ovens to using potato peelings to fertilize farmland.
Frito-Lay hopes the project will help the company save money on energy costs, particularly as oil prices approach $100 a barrel. What works in Casa Grande, one of 37 plants it operates in the United States and Canada, would then be replicated at other sites where possible.
So, eat Frito-Lay potato chips. Even the green ones. It’s for the environment.
3 Comments
Re: “said Indra K. Nooyi, PepsiCo’s chairman and chief executive.”
For our readers: Indra Nooyi is a woman (Indian) — thus, “chairwoman” or “chairperson” applies.
Tell the New York Times. They called her “chairman and chief executive.” It is likely that she has said she prefers to be called that. In fact, the Pepsico website refers to her that way.
I realize the NYTs (not you) called her that, but I can’t imagine she prefers that. Can one imagine a man wanting to be called “Chairwoman?”
Additionally, I think it is of interest to readers that a woman (and foreign-born, to boot) heads one of the very largest US companies.