By: Tate Ornelas
Starting on Nov 7, Starbucks will stop charging for milk alternatives. This includes soy, coconut, oat and almond milk. Milk alternatives add 70 to 80 cents to the total cost of the drink. Those who are lactose intolerant or plant-based food advocates have been fighting for this for years. Vox wrote an article on this topic and discussed that part of the reason Starbucks is partaking in this is because over the last year, they have been losing customers due to inflation. Other people are boycotting the company for a variety of reasons. Some of these reasons include the war in Gaza which has been a controversial topic over the last year.
Vox reported that a study was done that stated that a quarter of all Starbucks drinks are made with milk alternatives. When the math is done, it costs Starbucks 9 to 28 cents extra to make a drink with milk alternatives, but then the drink is sold for an additional 70 to 80 cents. Starbucks is charging more to sell the drinks than it costs to make them. In the past, Starbucks has been sued for supposed discrimination as roughly one-third of people in the United States are lactose intolerant.
Starbucks goal in the next six years is to significantly cut down on its greenhouse gas emissions. A big part of that goal is to offer more of a plant-based menu. Over the last 50 years, milk consumption has fallen in the United States, and Starbucks is using that to their advantage. Some people have even advocated for making plant-based milks the default option. Blue Bottle, a Nestle owned company did just that and reported 63% of customers stated that they preferred oat milk to any other milk. Blue Bottles whole approach is that our food choices are influenced by our food environments. If a person is in an environment where they have access to plant-based options at an affordable price, then they are more likely to utilize those options.
