Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Bumface
I never intended to compare local beef to foreign berries. I meant to compare local berries to foreign berries. Sorry if that wasn't clear.
Exactly, and rudimentary hand farming in a geography optimized for a certain food has very few inputs. Irrigation, pesticide use, fertilizers, and fuel are consumed at near zero levels.
3% of carbon from shipping is nothing compared to 25% of all carbon that goes into food production. We should optimize for the most efficient locations to produce food. Container shipping is extremely efficient by weight. Getting food from the warehouse to your local store and then back to your house in your car can be more carbon intensive than an intercontinental container trip for a food item.
Here's an analysis on how New Zealand lamb may be less carbon intensive for people in the UK to eat than UK produced lamb:
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/w...onment-2240702
I've seen a really good one on how apples from South Africa are less carbon intensive than UK apples when off-season because of the lower crop efficiency as well as the energy used for cold storage.
Here's one for foreign tomatoes being more efficient:
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/...tbl1_329187640 |
Are most imported fruits and vegetables really just from rudimentary farms though? If were to move towards that kind of model, which is very labour intensive, how much are we then paying the foreign workers?
It seems like the solution would be to overhaul local farming practices, instead of importing from places with better farming practices.
I was responding to a post about imported berries vs. locally grown meat from a small farmer's market.