Eric,
You raise a great point on the need to really think through the entire
life cycle of the food that we eat. I am passing along some articles
that I've come across on the climate impacts of food choices that
address the question of if it is better to "eat locally or eat
differently." There has certainly been quite a bit of discussion on
this listserv and even in the mainstream media about eating local.
There are certainly many reasons to eat local. One of the most commonly
cited ones is reducing the "food-miles" from where the food was produced
to where it is purchased and consumed, and thus (supposedly) reducing
greenhouse gas emissions and climate change impacts associated with
transport of the food.
These articles, however, show that "food-miles" from the farm or
production facility to the point of purchase by consumers actually forms
a very small part of the climate or greenhouse gas impacts of what we
eat (about 4%). Thus, those who are concerned about the effects of
their food choices on global climate change must also consider factors
such as:
-- the agricultural and industrial practices used to grow and harvest
the food (83% of GHG impacts)
-- the total supply-chain transportation (such as transport of feed to
animal production facilities, etc.) (11% of GHG impacts)
When these are taken into consideration, a convincing case can be made
that for limiting GHG emissions, a dietary shift away from red meat and
dairy and towards vegetables and grains is probably the most important
thing that an environmentally conscious consumer can do -- even more
important than buying local.
----------------------------------
The attached article, "Is it better to eat locally, or to eat
differently?" is a transcript of an NPR program I heard with a scientist
from Carnegie Mellon University. The second article, "Do Food Miles
Matter?" (
http://pubs.acs.org/subscribe/journals/esthag-w/2008/apr/science/ee_foodmiles.html)
is the "newsfeed" on the study he did from the journal Environmental
Science and technology, in which it was published. Finally, the PDF of
the whole article, "Food-Miles and the Relative Climate Impacts of Food
Choices in the United States," can be found at:
http://pubs.acs.org/cgi-bin/sample.cgi/esthag/2008/42/i10/pdf/es702969f.pdf.
Basically, the gist of the study (as far as I can tell) is that for
reducing greenhouse gas impact of food choices, buying local is only one
part of the solution. Actually, transportation from producer to
retailer accounts for only 4% of the total GHG impact of foods (all
transportation accounts for 11%). More significant are the agricultural
and industrial practices that go into growing and harvesting food, which
are responsible for 83% of the GHG impacts of food. This study differs
from many others on GHG emissions and food choices by considering not
only CO2, but other GHGs like CH4 (methane) and N2O (nitrous oxide),
which are emitted in smaller quantities much are much more potent than
CO2. By far the most GHG-intensive foods are red meat and dairy,
largely due to the methane emissions from ruminant digestion and manure,
and the nitrous oxide emissions from decomposing fertilizers and
manure. According to this author, shifting calories toward vegetables
has the biggest impact on reducing GHG emissions. Supposedly, if you
shift calories from red meat and dairy to vegetables just one day per
week you save more GHG gas emissions than if you eliminated ALL food
delivery miles, according to his analysis.
Of course, this is not to say not to eat local ... there ARE GHG savings
as well as other benefits, like knowing the farmer's production
practices (which influence soil, water, animal and human health, etc.),
and supporting local rural development. However, I think that it is
good for us to really look at the data and the complete life-cycle
impact of our consumption in order to make the choices and changes that
will have the greatest positive effects on the environment and society.
Thanks to all for providing a space for dialogue on living more
sustainable lifestyles!
Sincerely,
Megan Gregory
--
Megan M. Gregory
Graduate Research Assistant, The Agroecology Lab
Cornell University
Ithaca, NY 14853
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(847)287-7794
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi folks,
I recall having seen on this list, a year or so ago, a reference to a
popular article or two that purported to compare the comprehensive impacts of foods
that were raised locally with those shipped from afar. The point was to
demonstrate that it is not always obvious what is less environmentally damaging
to produce locally or trade from a distance.
If anyone recalls that reference, I would appreciate a reminder. I have a
faculty friend at Bucknell who is assembling a collection of popular press
food policy related materials and would like to use one on that topic.
Thanks,
Eric
Eric Clay, M.Div., Ph.D.
Community Coach
Shared Journeys, Inc.
832 North Aurora Street
Ithaca, NY 14850
607-592-6874
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])
SHARED JOURNEYS
That all may flourish and none be excluded
**************New MapQuest Local shows what's happening at your destination.
Dining, Movies, Events, News & more. Try it out
(http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002)
_______________________________________________
For more information about sustainability in the Tompkins County area, please visit: http://www.sustainabletompkins.org/
RSS, archives, subscription & listserv information for:
[email protected]
http://lists.mutualaid.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainabletompkins
free hosting by http://www.mutualaid.org
_______________________________________________
For more information about sustainability in the Tompkins County area, please
visit: http://www.sustainabletompkins.org/
RSS, archives, subscription & listserv information for:
[email protected]
http://lists.mutualaid.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainabletompkins
free hosting by http://www.mutualaid.org
