Buying local is not as green as you'd think

[sarahmichigan]

 It's just one study, so I'm not taking it as gospel, but it's interesting. And there's good news: you CAN make a difference in pollution by shifting what you eat. We eat no beef or chicken and just a bit of fish (of course environmental issues around fishing are a whole other... um.. kettle of fish...) and I try to eat locally in the summer when it's feasible, but I pretty much feel zero guilt about having fruit from South America in the middle of winter. If you live in the Midwest, it's pretty close to impossible to eat entirely local unless you want to eat venison jerky and canned peaches all winter.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/04/080422-green-food.html

Comments

Interesting...

[lilpeace.livejournal.com]

...although I think this was the most important part of it:

""The local food movement did not develop because of concerns about climate and greenhouse gas emissions," Morris said...It developed because people don't trust multinational companies," he said. "They have a desire to know the supplier [of their food]...The whole idea behind locavores is to try to create a market behind people farming the way we prefer and a distribution system for small-scale farms," Van Wing said."

That's why I try to eat local--to support a local and (in my mind) more sustainable food economy that doesn't shut out the small farmer. Plus it's fresher and more nutrient rich.

Re: Interesting...

[custardfairy.livejournal.com]

Ditto; further benefits would be a bonus, of course, but really it's about sustainable local agriculture for me. That and, because I eat meat, I like knowing how it's raised, fed, and processed.

Re: Interesting...

[lilpeace.livejournal.com]

Exactly. Knowing what I know about commercial meat production, I will do my best to never eat it again.

Re: Interesting...

[sarahmichigan.livejournal.com]

Yes, that's one reason I only eat fish and no chicken or beef. Not even taking into account animal cruelty, factory farming just so bad for the environment. (And I can't eat pig knowing how intelligent they are.)

I'm somewhat conflicted even about eating fish because there are issues with both over-fishing wild fish and environmental problems with fish farming.

Re: Interesting...

[pstscrpt.livejournal.com]

I can't eat pig knowing how intelligent they are.
The only thing I really put in that category is octopus.

environmental problems with fish farming
It depends how they do it, and to a large degree on the fish. A few places have started experimenting with inland salmon farming, which avoids the problems of disease from overcrowded farmed fish getting into the wild population (but not that the salmon is still fed wild fish -- or that salmon taste like hell, for that matter). Farm-raised tilapia and catfish can be fed mostly plant diets, so they don't have nearly as much impact as carnivorous fish.

Re: Interesting...

[zoe-1418.livejournal.com]

Ditto. I was just about to comment with this quote (so I will! ;-):

"People who support eating locally say the study does not undermine the locavore movement.

They're concerned about more than climate impacts, such as the effect of farming on communities and the conditions of farm workers, they say."

Re: Interesting...

[sarahmichigan.livejournal.com]

Yep, yep. There are still good reasons to eat local, even if it doesn't have quite the global impact we might hope for.

Re: Interesting...

[sarahmichigan.livejournal.com]

The fresher and more nutrient rich is the main reason for me to want to buy local. That, and also what you're saying about supporting a local economy. I feel really good about picking strawberries and raspberries from the local farmer and buying squash and corn from local roadside stands for both of those reasons.

[pstscrpt.livejournal.com]

I bet Americans would eat a lot less beef and chicken if the prices on the decent substitutes (e.g., Boca) reflected the fact that they're just made out of beans.

[custardfairy.livejournal.com]

I'm in no way an expert on this, but is part of the cost relative to the current soy prices which continue to rise? I know that not all meat alternatives equate to soy, but it seems that many do. I suppose processing has to also be accounted for in the price as well. I know I would buy more alternatives if they were more reasonably priced -- I actually really like veggie burgers and TVP.

[leighton.livejournal.com]

Quorn is great, but also too expensive. Understandable as it is grown in vats.

BTW, PETA is offering a reward for cheap, lab-created meat.

I generally don't eat things I would not be willing to kill with my own two hands. That leaves just a few types of fish that piss me off.

[custardfairy.livejournal.com]

Grown in vats? Interesting. And kinda ew, but no worse than a select few other food processing methods. :)

[leighton.livejournal.com]

And it's fungus!... but so are mushrooms.

[firecat]

Yet all that shipping, driving, and flying accounts for only a sliver of foods' climate impact—just 11 percent of the total

11% is more than a "sliver." More proof that National Geographic is not politically aligned the way I am.

(I don't spend a whole lot of mental effort on trying to eat local, but I don't approve of downplaying the environmental benefits of doing so. And besides, global warming is not the only environmental ill.)

[sarahmichigan.livejournal.com]

I had the same reaction- that 11 percent wasn't anything to sneeze about.