dieting feet
Jun. 9th, 2007 02:47 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Buying food from local sources is getting a lot of press lately, to the point that Axe & I heard a CBC feature on it while we were in the car. Which led to a conversation about the comparative benefits of eating an omnivorous but local diet vs eating vegetarian/vegan if your goal is to reduce your carbon footprint.
We're trying to reduce the amount of meat in our diet. But is it really helping if we cut down on the meat we buy - all raised in Southern Ontario - and replace it with vegetables shipped from all over the world?
(Of course the ideal is to go vegan and eat only locally grown organic foods, but just for the sake of argument.)
We're trying to reduce the amount of meat in our diet. But is it really helping if we cut down on the meat we buy - all raised in Southern Ontario - and replace it with vegetables shipped from all over the world?
(Of course the ideal is to go vegan and eat only locally grown organic foods, but just for the sake of argument.)
(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-12 12:49 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-12 11:58 am (UTC)My understanding is that it's really not calculable. There's a reference to calculating food miles in The Omnivore's Dilemma and unless you know exactly where stuff comes from and what went into it, there's no way to figure precisely. The calculations done by the person in the book (not Michael Pollan but someone he interviews) determine that for the food he was eating, it's about even. If you were comparing local meat vs. local veg, then it would be obvious, but local meat vs. imported veg, my guess would be that they're fairly evenly matched in terms of impact.