Why do we hate waste?

A thought has been intermittently rattling around my head. Why is it that when thinking about environmental problems, there is a peculiar moral condemnation of 'wasteful' consumption? Packaging from unused products contributes significantly to environmental degradation, plastics in particular, but no more so than those which are used. The carbon footprint of a product or activity is quite indifferent to the purpose of the consumer. But wasteful consumption tends to illicit moral condemnation in a way that high levels of consumption in general does not.

Take food waste. The BBC news website has an entire section dedicated to this category. It's certainly true that large amounts of food are bought which are never consumed. But this has no greater environmental impact than just eating more food. If in any given week I buy 20% more food than I actually eat, this would have no greater environmental impact than if I happened to eat 20% more, but I would be judged quite differently for doing so. Perhaps in this specific instance this is a good thing (avoiding body shaming etc), but the same is equally true for the consumption of other many other commodities. If I buy things I proceed to throw away, I'm judged differently and more so than if I live more lavishly and have the means to do so.

It might be argued that this kind of attitude is just a useful check on consumption, as 'wasteful' consumption can more easily and efficiently be reduced than non wasteful. But I'm not sure this is so. Consumption is typically wasteful when people put less effort into planning and are more spontaneous. But the ability to live spontaneously, have addition leisure time and reduce tedious mental effort are generally regarded as valid priorities. The point is not to say that they are more important than environmental concerns. They are plainly not. But it is not clear to me why they are less valid than many of our other priorities. If the point is that environmental concerns are dramatically underprioritised, it is not clear why the focus should not just be on general levels of consumption (or perhaps consumption of particular products) instead, as many environmental activists themselves encourage. And even if it did turn out that a particular focus on waste was practical, it is unlikely that this is why interest in it has come about.

This, I suspect, is an interesting example of how moral attitudes can impact how view the non moral aspects of questions. It is a very common psychological trait to view inconvenient things or things which require effort as virtuous, and things which involve laziness as bad. This can lead to the singling out of particular kinds of behaviour which may well have negative consequences, but are distinguished from other behaviours with similar consequences only in this mentioned respect. It can also even lead to outright fallacies, for example in the case of non-packaged cucumbers, which turn out to not just be less convenient but more environmentally harmful, due to their very short expiry date.  This explanation is not fully satisfying , as abstinence and suffering  are also often viewed as virtuous in a similar way, and when it comes to moral condemnation of consumption waste is still king. Perhaps the psychological sense of revulsion at the thought of laziness is simply greater.