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

[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.