Many people who want to reduce their ecological footprint
have focused on how much energy is expended (and how
many climate-warming greenhouse gases are emitted) in
transporting food from its place of production to its place of
sale. The typical grocery store item is shipped by truck, air,
and/or sea for many hundreds of miles before reaching the
shelves, and this transport consumes oil. This concern over
“food-miles” has helped drive the “locavore” movement to
buy and eat locally sourced food.
However, food’s transport from producer to retailer, as
measured by food-miles, is just one source of carbon emissions
in the overall process of producing and delivering food. In
2008, environmental scientists Christopher Weber and H. Scott
Mathews conducted a thorough life-cycle analysis (p. 400) of
U.S. food production and delivery. By filling in the table below,
you will get a better idea of how our dietary choices contribute to
climate change.
After measuring mass, energy content, and dollar value
for each food type, the researchers calculated emissions
per kilogram, calorie, and dollar. In every case, red meat
produced the most emissions, followed by dairy products
and chicken, fish, and eggs. They then calculated that
shifting one’s diet from meat and dairy to fruits, vegetables,
and grains for just one day per week would reduce
emissions as much as eating 100% locally (cutting foodmiles
to zero) all the time. Knowing all this, how would
you choose to reduce your own food footprint? By how
much do you think you could reduce it?
Trending now
This is a popular solution!
Step by step
Solved in 2 steps
