"food miles" no indicator of energy consumed? (BBC

cmlek

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

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? Wink

Thoughts?

Melissa

pstarr

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.
_________________
director

ree rah rip ram. sunofabitch godamn. hidey didey christ almighty. rah rah crap wav