Researchers at Cornell University released a study that confirms what we already knew: eating local is better for the planet and better for our health. The study found that the United States food production industry uses almost as much fossil fuels as our entire fleet of automobiles. This seems impossible until you consider that it takes nearly 2,200 calories of fossil fuel to produce and package one can of 1-calorie diet soda (and the average American, according to the study, drinks 600 cans of soda a year). Even a head of lettuce produced in irrigated California takes 4,000 calories to grow, process and ship across the country.
Don’t believe it? You can read the full article on the Cornell study, or keep reading for some of the key findings:
- A vegetarian diet with the same calories as the average American diet requires 33 percent less fossil fuel energy to produce, according to the study.
- The FDA recommends that the average American consume 2,503 calories per day instead of the current average of 3,747 calories per day. The researchers recommend the following practices to reduce calories at maximum benefit to your health and the planet:
- 40-65 percent reduction in meat, fish, milk, sweeteners, fats and oils
- 15 percent reduction in grains and starchy roots
- No reduction in eggs, nuts, vegetables and fruits
With this in mind, I’m feeling better that we’ve tabled our discussion of buying a Prius and chosen to do a year of local eating instead. Sounds like the impact on the planet (and definitely our health) will be greater than making the switch to a hybrid car.
7 comments
Julie says:
August 26, 2008 at 7:41 am (UTC 2 )
Hatchet was nice enough to send me some additional information about this study, and one stat that I thought was interesting was that out of the 19% of our US fossil fuel consumption that comes from food production, only 5% is from actually MOVING the food from place to place and a whopping 14% is from producing and packaging that food.
The good news is that it’s easy to impact that 14% by simply buying more whole food and less packaged food, and by buying organic so that you’re supporting farmers who opt for fertilizer and treatments that do not, by definition, come from fossil fuels.
Nickie says:
August 24, 2008 at 7:22 am (UTC 2 )
I think it is great that studies like this are done. I make an effort to visit our local farmer’s market for our produce needs, as we recently moved and won’t be able to start a garden until next year.
When we do go to the grocery store, I’m proud of my boyfriend (who would never have noticed last year) who gets excited about only buying local produce…and skips over the stuff grown in far away lands.
Kudos to you for posting such important topics on your blog!
Hatchet says:
August 23, 2008 at 8:58 pm (UTC 2 )
Yay Locavores!
In response to Myrto’s concerns about shifting the problems of food produced “over there” for food produced “right here”, the problems that can be caused are already being caused. They are just being felt mostly “over there”, where “there” may be a foreign country that doesn’t care about its workers, soil or water as much as we do. Also, if you stop to think about it, we USED to do all our own food growing and processing in all our local communities until some bright bulb figured out that someone else could or would do it cheaper elsewhere.
By bringing the demand for food local, however, there is a greater chance for good. Local communities would see an increase in jobs that are within their community, money stays and is spent within the community and you can control your food a LOT better when you know who makes it and where it and any inputs come from. When you just walk into a grocery store and pick up a head of lettuce, you get NO SAY in how that lettuce was grown, picked, shipped or how the workers in that line were treated. If, however, you choose to either grow your own, or develop a relationship with a farmer you get to choose the farmer and support their practices. Don’t like the conventional farmer? Try another one whose farming practices are more in line with YOUR environmental ethics. Think the organic farmer is too “out there” for your food to be safe with them? Find another one.
In short, moving the demand for food from outsourced to locally sourced will be a GOOD thing, overall, for our communities.
Myrto Ashe says:
August 19, 2008 at 11:17 pm (UTC 2 )
That’s interesting because the fossil fuel impact of well-travelled food often tends to be minimized. For example, it is staggering when the food is flown in, but perhaps not so noticeable when the food comes from China by boat. Locavores have had to use a combination of reasons (support the local economy, peak oil, improve health, etc…) to fully justify the effort of eating locally. And yet, adopted on a large scale, local food may prove problematic (irrigation, energy used in home canning and freezing). At least, cutting out the Diet Coke (and all other bottled drinks, really, especially the ones requiring refrigerated transportation) seems the obvious first step for folks concerned with the carbon footprint of their food.
By the way, WRT processed soy, Sharon Astyk (www.sharonastyk.com) claims that making tofu is easy with the right equipment. Though I’ve also heard that’s not true. I’m hoping to move to a vegetarian diet once the kids actually eat vegetables.
And another carbon consideration is simply raw vs. cooked food. It’s much better for the planet to eat fresh fruit than fruit pie for example. Also, interestingly, it’s what you might choose to do if you have to make all the processed food yourself. Let’s see, do I bite into this peach, or do I mix flour and butter and roll out dough, measure sugar and flour and peel and cut up the fruit, then wait an hour for the thing to bake while it heats up my house to over 90 degrees…
eastendjenn says:
August 19, 2008 at 10:44 am (UTC 2 )
I’ve been trying to move our family toward more local fare recently, and while we’re certainly not exclusive, we’re making some great strides. Starting in our own backyard – we planted a garden for the first time this summer (just hauled in 30+ pounds of potatoes this past weekend). But it’s summer, and the season is making that a little easier for us. I’m looking forward to learning much more about the benefits of local by reading here!
Julie says:
August 19, 2008 at 10:20 am (UTC 2 )
I agree that vegan can be a really low-impact diet, but I also think that many folks (myself included–my family was vegetarian for nearly 12 years and only recently introduced local pastured chicken to our diet) use a lot of processed foods to supplement the vegetarian/vegan diet. In our case, we’ve given up Boca/Quorn/Morningstar Farms type meat replacements in favor of chicken, feeling like it’s the better choice.
But I do agree that the invisible choices are huge–I don’t even want to think about how I am contributing to Colorado’s overpopulation and overuse of scarce water resources…
MamaBird/SurelyYouNest says:
August 19, 2008 at 10:17 am (UTC 2 )
Wow, fascinating study. I remember reading, too, that if you’re vegan it trumps local food. Not that I am vegan
just that it inspires me to cut out the meat and dairy whenever it occurs to me. I often think that it’s the invisible choices (insulation, where you live, etc) that are far more important overall to your impact.