Food miles don't go the distance

[Dead_Parrot]

Ever thought that getting your food shipped in from far away might be better than local/home grown?

Nope, neither did I. But here's something to chew over...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4807026.stm

Boiling potatoes is horrendously energy intensive, and this simple act dwarfs the energy consumed during their production and transport.

But less obvious to the average consumer is the fact that soil itself produces greenhouse gases, and different types of soils produce different amounts of gas.

These gases, which include carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide, are emitted by the millions of bacteria which live in the soil.

... we do know enough to seriously question the scientific validity of simply using food miles as a proxy of environmental damage.

Some very interesting stuff in there...

[fed-up]

1. A bullshit article to downplay importance of buying locally & cause doubt

in consumer's minds as to whether they are helping the environment by buying locally.

This paragraph is the clincher:
"Unfortunately though, simply getting consumers to target food miles when making their purchasing decisions may not necessarily bring about a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, as these are emitted from many more places within food systems than just trucks, planes and automobiles."

If I buy food grown 10 miles from my farmer's market, versus buying something shipped in from South America, it will mean a reduction in greenhouse gas emmisions.

What I do with it after I buy it, will be the same no matter where the item comes from.

Of course if one buys from local farmers that grow organically then that will also decrease greenhouse gas emmisions.

[Dead_Parrot]

9. You missed the point completely

Soil is not just soil the world over. Variations in microbial life mean that if you grow the wrong crop in your soil, you may end up causing more GH gas emissions than if they were carried in in bulk.

"Working in harmony with nature" does not mean planting whatever the fuck you like wherever you happen to be. This guy's just pointing out another reason why this is the case.

[fed-up]

11. Sounds like a Patrick Moore speech, I did not miss point-you missed veiled

dis's on the Slo Growth food movement. He is comparing what people do AFTER they purchase their food with what it takes to get the food to their house.

"A lot of people object to this accumulation of food miles, and we seem to have increasing calls for "local food" and "slow food". While those making these calls may seem to have common sense on their side, the science which could be used to underpin their arguments is at best confusing, and at worst absent."


Yes, the points he brings up are valid as to amounts of energy/green house gases used while growing/cooking/storing, but he is leading consumers to believe that buying locally is a questionable practice.

"As a professional scientist, I need to recognise these "knowledge gaps" and then undertake some research that will hopefully fill them. As a consumer though, you need to eat, so what should you do?

At the moment, science can't help - as we simply don't enough. My personal advice would be to do what ever best satisfies your conscience, but don't kid yourself that by so doing you are saving the world.

Confirmation of such cause and effect will require a lot more science be done"

[silverweb]

2. WTF?

"Boiling potatoes is horrendously energy intensive, and this simple act dwarfs the energy consumed during their production and transport."

:wtf:

This guy's nuts! Notice that there's NO attempt to offer ANY data to try to back up that stupid, stupid assertion -- or any of the others he makes, for that matter.

Okay, so what you're doing isn't enough to save the world, so don't bother trying? That's like Cheney saying that energy conservation may be a personal virtue but isn't good policy. I wonder which oil company paid for this piece of bullshit propaganda?

:crazy:

[Dead_Parrot]

12. you also missed the point...

But I take it you have some figures handy to explain why the assertion is stupid?

Boiling 1Kg of potatoes could use anything up to 500Wh of energy: A truck carrying 7000Kg of potatoes with a 150Kw/200hp engine could travel over 1,000 miles at 50mph for the same amount (per potato).

God, I must be bored...:silly:

[IrateCitizen]

16. So, you're eating those shipped potatoes raw, then?

You seem to have ignored the nearly meaningless step of COOKING those potatoes once you bring them into you house, as did the author of this BS article.

One situation is simply cooking, while the other is cooking plus transportation.

[Dead_Parrot]

19. Sigh... no...

But if your buying you nice local potatoes and then cooking them on an oversize hob, you're wasting more energy than if you shipped them in and used the right pan size. The point of the article is that you can't just say "me buy local, me green", because ignoring the other aspects of food production and preperation may well undo all your good work.

People like memes like "buy local" - or "no nukes" for that matter - because it gives them direction without them having to engage thier brain. If you actually take the time to look at the big picture, you find it's just a little more complex.

If all other things are equal, "buy local" is a good rule of thumb: But you may find all other things are not actually equal.

[NJCher]

3. I agree--very new concepts in here

What a fascinating article. I'm going to mention it on the gardening forum.

Something I want to do (but I think it's a "before its time" idea) is teach suburbanites how to grow their own food in their yards. I've been experimenting with all kinds of techniques on this for years. For people without a lot of space, for example, there is vertical gardening. This year I'm growing tomatoes in hanging baskets. I have a lot of land to grow things but a lot of people don't. I'd like to be able to teach these techniques to everyone who would like to lessen their dependence on supermarket food, not only for reasons regarding energy but also because of genetically modified foods, chemicals, etc.

I saved this article and will be passing this concept around. Thanks for posting it, Dead_Parrot.




Cher

[Dead_Parrot]

4. We have a gardening forum?

Damn, this place is too big these days. :D

[fed-up]

6. The article will only confuse people-great book "Square Foot Gardening"nt

[NJCher]

8. I agree it is confusing

But over time, people will grasp the concepts.




Cher

[IrateCitizen]

17. Mel Bartholemew's book is definitely a must-have!

I use his square food method in a little garden I keep behind our co-op. It's great for high-density crops like beans, spinach and lettuce!

[dcfirefighter]

21. That book got me started on gardening

Now I generally use 'Biointensive' Gardening methods - though, with a small yard, I still use many of the vertical tricks.
I just transplanted my cool season crops to the garden, now it's time for St. Pat's drinking.

[NJCher]

5. get people thinking

I think the point is to get people thinking about food prep and energy cost. As I read the part about potatoes, I thought about slow cookers, for example. They barely burn up a cent and a half in cooking something like potatoes (that was the last figure I read). So if a person becomes aware, then they might opt for the slow cooker instead of boiling the potatoes separately on a gas or electric burner. All it requires is a little planning ahead.

Another option, of course, is to cook the potatoes with another food. If you are having a roast, for example, cook the potatoes with the roast and that way they don't rack up a separate energy cost. Much more flavorful, too.




Cher

[NJCher]

7. yes, and the gardeners are socially conscious

We are, for the most part, a no pesticdes group that composts and tries to do the right thing. The wrong thing, of course, is spraying every bug with a pesticide, thereby poisoning ourselves and wiping out the beneficial bugs.

Anyway, c'mon over and join us if you're a gardener! The forum is a little quiet in the winter months but is heating up now, especially with the gardeners from the south already well on their way with their vegetable gardens.




Cher

p.s. and yes, this place IS big! But don't you love it? :loveya:

[fed-up]

10. Love your bumper sticker, I want one for my organic farmer boyfriend nt

[NJCher]

13. available online

Just google "gardeners against bush" in image search :)




Cher

[lakeguy]

14. wouldn't a comparison of soil output of greenhouse gases

for the same product be dwarfed by transportation sources? you need certain types of soil to grow various foods so i would guess that GH gas output wouldn't be that much different when looking at the same product.

[Dead_Parrot]

15. Possibly not...

I'll attempt to throw some figures out: to stick to my truckload of potatoes, you'd have to sum up the entire CO2 & CH4 output of about 1 acre over a year. That a lot of worms, microbes and other wrigglies all doing their thing, up against a 2 hour truck drive (depending on your definition of local) which - at 10mpg - is about 20kg Carbon (as dioxide, monoxide and god knows what other shit). Call it 50Kg to include harvesting.

For comparison, You'll breath out about 55kg of carbon over the year: you weigh a lot less than the wrigglies in an acre (~1,300 Kg in invertebrates). If they produced CO2 at the same rate per KG that we do, that would be about 950Kg - and that's not including microbes.

A significant shift in the soils fauna might well swing the "natural" emissions up by more than the harvesting and transport emissions - especially given the potency of CH4 as a greenhouse gas.

Or, of course, it might swing down. Like the guy said, it's something we've never really looked at before, but maybe we should be doing. Nature is more complicated than we usually think.

[phantom power]

18. Clearly, we need potatos that are easier to boil.

[Dead_Parrot]

20. And points that are easier to make.

:(

[dcfirefighter]

22. Not all energy is created equally

Transportation is very high 'quality' energy, from high energy density fuel, over high embodied energy (also high quality energy) roads. It also is, almost by necessity, a GHG emitter.

OTOH, cooking, especially with hot water, is much easier to do using non GHG and / or renewable energy sources. With Solar DHW, a large portion of the heat energy can be taken from the sun, which is almost impossible to do with transportation.

BTW, potatoes are just about the most efficient crop on a calorie per land area basis. Off the top of my head, you could grow enough calories for one person for one year in 2500 s.f. or so. (or feed 15+ people an acre)

[rfkrfk]

23. this story is rubbish

food transport, is usually by rail or ship-barge

when you buy bananas, don't assume they got to the
store, all the way by truck

[dcfirefighter]

24. How about full recovery of pollution costs and let prices sort it out?

Wishful thinking for now, but that's my ideal solution: a carbon (and other pollution) tax, full recovery for truck caused road damages, etc., would generally sort out the exactly appropriate distance your food would come.