Many a weekend I have enjoyed going down to the farmers market and selecting fresh fruit and veges and supporting the local farmers. To top it all off, I like knowing that my early morning commitment is making a difference in reducing the carbon footprint for the environment.
Then today I read this article in the September addition of New Scientist magazine 'Dinners Dirty Secret' which challenges the effectiveness of reducing our carbon footprint by sacrificing 52 weekend sleep-ins! The article questions the significance of ‘food miles’ in calculating the carbon footprint accumulated during food production.
The study indicates that the CO2 produced by the distance food travels (food miles) accounts for only 11% of the total carbon dioxide produced during the complete food production.
The total carbon footprint of food should more accurately be measured by every joule of energy that goes into it. For example, when farming cattle we would need to include the carbon costs of grass including fertiliser, making hay and irrigating pasture, we would also need to include the methane produced by cows during their lifetime.
This indicates that we would reduce more greenhouse gases by selecting foods that are less carbon intensive in their complete production i.e. dropping one meal of red meat a week, than we can by just buying locally. For example shopping locally every day of the year will reduce my carbon footprint by 4% annually, in comparison an equivalent saving can be made reducing my red meat and dairy intake just one day a week and replacing it with either chicken, fish, eggs or vegetables.
Theoretically this means I could replace meat with veges one day a week and reclaim my weekend sleep-ins whilst retaining my contribution to reducing our carbon footprint! Or I could double my contribution and do both!
Has anyone else heard of similar views? Or any contradictory ones?
Cheers
Tink
Comments
Hi Tink, this is a very interesting debate and one that is crucial for some of our main primary exports. Large retailers such as Tescos in the UK have been sourcing locally produced products in an attempt to reduce "food miles."
NZ producers claim that our climate, soil and farming practises allow us to produce the same food much more efficiently than in the UK. As a result the total carbon footprint of (for example) a kilo of butter produced in NZ and shipped to the UK is still lower than the footprint of a kilo of butter produced and sold in the UK!
As a consumer, I try to be very aware of the food I consume and the load I'm putting on the natural environment as a result. Here are some of the things my partner and I do:
- We live in a vegetarian household - my partner has been vegetarian for about 30 years, and I occasionally eat fish but no other meat. I try to select fish according to the Greenpeace Good Fish Guide to make sure it is [fairly] sustainable.
- We shop at local farmers' markets whenever possible or farm gates when we are travelling
- We buy organic food whenever we can
- We only buy organic, free-range eggs
- We only buy seasonal fruit and vegetables - for example tomatoes and stone fruit in summer, corn and melons in autumn, apples, kiwifruit etc in winter, asparagus in spring. (The exception is bottled or tinned fruit and veges)
- We try to avoid over-packaged food and always take our own cloth bags when shopping.
- We try to integrate our shopping trips with other activities so we are not making a special journey in the car (shopping is virtually the only reason we use the car - the rest of the time it's public transport, walking, bikes or scooters)
There is one thing we do that at first glance doesn't seem consistent with the rest: We travel across town to shop at our preferred supermarket rather than using our local supermarket. We do this consciously because the supermarket we use has a wide range of local, organic food and (importantly) all their organics are integrated with the rest of the food on their shelves so it is easy to find [instead of having a cramped little organic ghetto as in many other shops]. They also clearly mark country of origin on all their produce and have a wide range of free range eggs (and meat).
The reason we travel to use this supermarket is because we want to support them in the effort they are making to be responsible retailers. We believe that by shopping there and encouraging others to do so, we are helping the business to remain sustainable and sending a message to other supermarkets that there is a market for this kind of thing.
So yes - the issue of overall carbon footprint is a big one, and one I think about a lot!
Submitted by Lindis on 12 March 2009 16:35:57
Wow! so if I lived in the UK it would be better to buy food grown and exported from New Zealand rather than a locally produced! That seems so bizarre to my 'buy local' mindset.
Cheers
Tink
Submitted by Tink on 13 March 2009 14:46:38
Well, it depends on the type of food.
The argument put forward by New Zealand dairy and meat producers is that our animals are pasture-fed all year round, in an environment that is very suited to pasture growth. In many parts of the UK, dairy animals require supplementary feeding in order to produce the quantity and quality of dairy produce required by consumers.
A similar argument could be put forward for rice - it would be more sensible for New Zealanders to buy rice produced in parts of Asia that are inherently more suited to growing it, rather than encouraging a local rice-growing industry.
On the other hand, surely everyone would be better to eat food that is suited to growing in their local area, and eat it when it is in season. When I was growing up you simply couldn't buy tomatoes in winter or grapes in spring. These days people seem to expect every type of food to be available all year round - and that means either importing it or growing it in an artificial environment.
Submitted by Lindis on 14 March 2009 14:12:35
For those who don't have a sense of 'seasonal' fruit and veges, here's some food for thought...
In March/April we are harvesting the last of our summer fruit and moving into autumn/winter crops. Look for:
Apples & pears (any time from January to May depending on the variety)
Peaches, nectarines, plums (reaching the end of their summer season)
Blackberries, melons, grapes, avocado, tamarillo, feijoa, guava, figs, various nuts & berries (all autumn harvest time)
Tomatoes and capsicums are coming to the end of their season, but sweetcorn, pumpkin and squash are just getting started!
Some fruit and vegetables just aren't grown commercially in New Zealand. This means they have to be imported... resulting in transportation costs and meaning they have to be sprayed to avoid imported bugs etc. Two reasons to avoid consuming them in large quantities! These are things like pineapples, papaya and (unfortunately) bananas.
Submitted by Lindis on 14 March 2009 14:30:03
Lol I just found out there is a name for people who like to buy their food locally! I’m now officially a ‘Locavore’ - someone who attempts to either grow their own food or buy it from the local region. I’m not so good at the growing part though! We don’t have a space for a vege garden but we do have potted herbs and lettuces on our veranda.
Submitted by Tink on 17 March 2009 09:12:57
Your right Lindis, analysing the carbon footprint and buying local is all relative to the specific type of food under analysis. The New Zealand Herald had an article about buying food which gave some interesting comparisons:
“…importing beans from Uganda or Kenya - where the farms are small, tractor use is limited, and the fertiliser is almost always manure - tends to be more efficient than growing beans in Europe, with its reliance on energy-dependent irrigation systems. Another study showed roses grown in Kenya and air-freighted to Britain actually had a smaller carbon footprint than roses from Holland which are usually grown in heated greenhouses.
New Zealand researchers, like Professor Caroline Saunders at Lincoln University also did sterling work debunking food miles arguments for our major exports. She found that lamb raised in New Zealand and shipped 11,000 miles (17,840 km) to England produced 688 kilograms of carbon-dioxide emissions per tonne, about a fourth the amount produced by British lamb. In part, that is because pastures in New Zealand need far less fertiliser than most grazing land in Britain.
The environmental burden imposed by importing apples from New Zealand to Britain can be lower than locally grown apples because we have more sunshine - meaning the yield of New Zealand apples far exceeds the yield of those grown in northern climates. It also helps that much of our electricity is generated by renewable sources, which don't emit large amounts of carbon dioxide.” New Zealand Herald, 14 March, 2009
If anyone is interested in seeing the full article (4pages) you can find it at http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10561593
Submitted by Tink on 17 March 2009 09:36:46
Yes, it's a very interesting and complex subject isn't it Tink?
As with a lot of this kind of thing, it's a matter of being a conscious consumer and trying to make the best choices for your own life. Also it's important to always be open to new information and try to process that information and apply it in a way that's relevant to you.
Patrick brought up a very interesting subject on this very forum, back in June:
http://sustainability.govt.nz/forum/2008/who-has-lower-carbon-footprint-...
Submitted by Lindis on 17 March 2009 15:09:35
Brilliant!!
Submitted by Tink on 18 March 2009 15:39:08
You know those companies which produce excessive pollution can buy carbon credit from industries and business that do not do the same. So all you have to give money to a company to buy carbon credit and get a certificate. But point is carbon producing industries is they have to pay from their pocket. Nice economics really.
Submitted by prowall on 9 May 2009 23:59:00