Food miles - it's not as obvious as you think

[Jenny Green]

Interesting article about the difference between food miles and carbon footprints:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/06/opini ... nd&emc=rss

For example:
Incorporating these measurements into their assessments, scientists reached surprising conclusions. Most notably, they found that lamb raised on New Zealand’s clover-choked pastures and shipped 11,000 miles by boat to Britain produced 1,520 pounds of carbon dioxide emissions per ton while British lamb produced 6,280 pounds of carbon dioxide per ton, in part because poorer British pastures force farmers to use feed. In other words, it is four times more energy-efficient for Londoners to buy lamb imported from the other side of the world than to buy it from a producer in their backyard. Similar figures were found for dairy products and fruit.

[FatB]

I don't want to argue with scientists, but it hardly seems credible, does it.
Five times as much! I'm sorry but I find it hard to believe.

[Elderflower]

Hmm - New Zealand scientists claim that it`s better for us to eat N.Z. lamb than home grown?
Hmm - well they would say that wouldn`t they?

[Geoff]

Have you considered the food miles in organic fertilisers?
Where I used to work we used many tonnes of hoof and horn (to make fire fighting foam) and it came also exclusively from South America so I guess fertiliser does too (admittedly by sea).

[madasafish]

There is enough ambiguity in their choice of things to analyse- cos the data CANNOT be exact- to prove whatever you want.

[oldherbaceous]

So hopefully we are still all going to buy British.

Blooming scientist with their facts and figures.

[Jenny Green]

It's all starting to make my brain hurt.
I think I'm going to buy what I like to eat!

[Weed]

One has to consider what the carbon footprint of the scientists would be to produce all this 'Oh so vital' information

I am with Jenny...a little bit of what you fancy does you good...I am talking food here OH

[Johnboy]

Hi Jenny,
People complain about Supermarkets but I heard one
"Expert" on Carbon Footprinting say that Supermarkets have a better Carbon Footprint than Farmers Markets!
His explanation was actually plausible. Supermarket deliveries are up to 40 tons using a 12 litre powered lorry but for a Farmers Market you may have as many as 50 Traders all using at least a 2 litre
powered vehicle and generally only transporting about a quarter of a ton. Which means 100 litres of power to transport 12.5 tons of goods. These figures are for demonstrating his point and are only as an example to give you an idea at what he is driving at.
What do you think of that?
As regards the Lamb I eat. It is raised three fields from where I live and the Sheep walk the 1.5 miles to the Abattoir. The carcases are delivered back to the farm already partially butchered and I drive less than a mile when I go to collect it so in all that meat is slightly better the NZ Lamb. The farm is 2 miles from the Abattoir so 4 miles in all for delivery. My vehicle does in excess of 60 mpg so my Lamb has quite a good Carbon Footprint.
JB.

[Jenny Green]

What are the lambs fed Johnboy?
I was interested to read that NZ lambs have less of a carbon footprint because they eat fresh from the fields, because I thought our lambs did too, being born in the spring and slaughtered before the winter?
Edited to add: Please don't tell me it's other lambs.

[Chantal]

Having read all that lot it seems the only thing to do is live off your own vegetables without using fertilizers. Even FYM presumably ups my carbon footprint as the horses may be fed on something with a high CF.

I suppose peeing on everything is all that's left to me.

[submariner]

Everyone is onto the game of "carbon footprints" now.Car firms, insurance companies, you name it they're at it! It has become big business. I wish I could find a scam to make lots of money! We are being programmed, just as George Orwel predicted. All this while China build one coal power station a week, and polute rivers so badly, that they have killed off a species of Porpoice, and America pay lip service to it all. The "green lobby" are laughing up their sleves at the prats who listen to their dross, while the directors of the various organisations are becoming rich off our (not mine,I hope, although I suppose I unconsiously contribute) backs. You might think by the above that I'm fed up with the so called "experts" and their predictions. How right you are!!!!!!!!!!! In fact I am b***** angry at the way we are being manipulated. (Sorry for the rant)

[madasafish]

"Expert" on Carbon Footprinting say that Supermarkets have a better Carbon Footprint than Farmers Markets! "

>Johnboy

The example you then quoted from him was ( as you might expect) drivel. He made no mention of distance travelled. Eg local farmers 20 miles. Supermarket 200 miles (as a minimum).

I'm afraid most of these so called experts can't understand arithmetic so I treat most of what they say as complete b#ll####s. If I can see the flaw just by reading it (and am no genius) they have spent NO time or effort in reaching their conclusions.

[richard p]

with any "research" you have to find out who is paying for it to be done before you read it. mostly it is set up so that it gives results favourable for the business thats paying for it. and that includes a lot of "academic" research done at universities where big business is giving funds either directly to the university or indirectly via consulting fees etc to individuals

[Tigger]

Oh no....... Chanters is back on Gold manure/lotion again.