Hoarding is exactly what the government is doing right now by filling the SPR, and frankly it's the best thing that could happen. It drives prices up. High prices encourage demand destruction. They also finance new well development. The hoarded oil gives us a buffer to fall back on once shortages become more prevalent. High prices are what we need in order to adapt to what's coming, and the sooner they happen, the better.
While I do agree in theory that there's more to consider in reducing fossil fuel used than just transportation, I guess I'm too idealistic to see why they're pooh-poohing the concept of food miles as much as they are. Its true that packaging, cooking, storing, etc. all take energy, but I still don't really understand why they say that detracts from travel distance.
And I guess I'm being paranoid, but the last section (which concludes "we just don't know enough yet") sounds just silly. Reducing energy used in growing crops, land use, packaging etc. is noble, but so is reducing energy from transport costs. It sounds like some food-giant trying to convince me to keep buying from abroad. Y'know?
Posted: Thu Mar 16, 2006 5:46 pm Post subject: Re: "food miles" no indicator of energy consumed?
It is actually a somewhat thoughful article and helps to call attention to the energy content of our food. Most people just haven't given this any attention at all, and might just believe their food grows in plastic inside the food warehouse. I think that he is kind of grandstanding though to get contraversey and readers. The fact is, the less miles food travels, the less need their is for fungicides, refrigeration, preservatives, coatings, and packaging and he know that. _________________ ree rah rip ram. sunofabitch godamn. hidey didey christ almighty. rah rah crap
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum