Few consumers are unaware of the sudden spike in prices for such household staples as milk, flour and eggs. Griping about the cost of food has become something of a national sport, and of course, no one likes it when the cost of anything rises. But there is an argument to be made that higher food costs are not only something that we will have to learn to live with, but also something that we should learn to live with.

Food in America has historically been very cheap and abundant, and as a consequence, many of us have taken it for granted. For 1995, it's estimated that edible food losses exceeded 96 billion pounds, or "about 27 percent of the 356 billion pounds of the edible food available for human consumption in the United States," according to a U.S. Department of Agriculture study that, the New York Times noted last week, was published more than 10 years ago.

These words should give anyone pause. After all, even if we live in times of unparalleled prosperity, being careless of resources seems foolhardy. In recent weeks, as people in Haiti, Egypt and elsewhere are rioting because of sudden spikes in food costs, taking abundance for granted seems downright immoral.

But in recent months at least, there are signs that we are taking our food a little less for granted. Some of these signs seem like disturbing trends. Donations to food banks are down, just as more people are seeking help, said Joyce Rothermel, chief executive officer of the Greater Pittsburgh Community Food Bank.

She theorized some people are dealing with the rising costs of gas and food by becoming more efficient in using the food they have, leaving less to donate to the food bank.

This change doesn't really bother Ms. Rothermel. At least in Pittsburgh, donations from food service providers and consumers are only a tiny percentage of contributions, something that she has no desire to change.

There are other ways for needs to be met, she said, such as the recent passage of a farm bill that will increase the availability of government commodities. Ms. Rothermel prefers government commodities because they are more equitable -- a much larger number of people get the same amounts of the same kind of food -- and they're easier to handle.

Telling people to waste less food so they can donate it to the food bank doesn't seem to be an efficient or effective solution. The best way to decrease waste may be the way it is already happening. When food prices go up, it seems that we waste less food because we see it as more valuable.

When restaurants are run as they should be, they are models for minimal food waste. Restaurants operate on razor-thin profit margins. Throwing food away is basically equivalent to throwing dollars and cents in the garbage can. Restaurants have developed impressive strategies for minimizing food waste. Computer systems help chefs precisely calibrate orders based on past demand. Frequent and careful inventories help chefs keep track of exactly what they have on hand and what they need.

Of course, many restaurants are not so well run (part of the reason that so many restaurants fail in their first few years of business), and even restaurants that are run efficiently can have problems with waste. Giant portion sizes sometimes get eaten, but often lead to a lot of food being thrown away. I often wonder how many leftovers get taken home just to wind up in the garbage a few days later.

The more insidious problem with food waste is where it winds up -- in landfills, where it contributes to various environmental problems. A large percentage of this edible waste could be composted, which not only reduces its environmental effects but also allows much of the food's nutrients to be re-used in future agriculture.

In San Francisco, a city-wide program that encourages households to separate out compostable garbage and put it out with their trash has seen remarkable success. The San Francisco Board of Supervisors has mandated a goal of 75 percent waste diversion for all of San Francisco by the year 2010, and composting is a major component of how they plan to accomplish this goal.

Currently, the Pittsburgh Public Works Department is not considering a food composting project, said director Guy Costa. That means the burden is on individuals and private organizations to encourage the practice. And while I currently only have anecdotal evidence to support it, in recent years, composting seems to have become a topic of conversation among a much larger group of people.

So while we will all probably continue to gripe and groan over rising grocery bills, if changing conditions helps us change our behavior, we'll have something to feel good about as well. Collectively, as we reduce waste and start composting, our garbage pile is shrinking, as is the amount of dollars and cents that used to wind up in trash cans instead of on dinner plates.

For 1995, it's estimated that edible food losses exceeded 96 billion pounds, or "about 27 percent of the 356 billion pounds of the edible food available for human consumption in the United States."