Comments on: “Chickin” or the egg: L.A. vegan restaurants serve egg-y fake meat

By: Siel

Siel — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 00:37:07 +0000

There are actually quite a few hardcore locavores in my ‘hood, but in any case, I too would be interested in some numbers. I can imagine how hard this would be, though, since the #s by definition would have to be extremely local and specific (i.e. studying a single person’s backyard urban homestead), without as much opportunity for broad application.

I think we all agree about the average American diet being too meat-centric — but I think what I’m trying to get at more is that these things really do depend on different locations and individual practices. It’d be really ridiculous, for ex, to exhort a non-cow-centric diet to the Maasai — or to urge Kim in Alaska to go on a vegan diet.

And to go along with what MsMeryMac’s saying about supporting local restaurants / local economy having benefits beyond what’s easily measurable — the same sort of benefits hold true of supporting local farms — including the ones that incorporate livestock — vs. synthetic Taiwanese “food” imports.

By: Martin

Martin — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 21:24:59 +0000

Getting the average western family to eat LESS meat would do way more for the environment than getting the vegans to think about carbon footprints. Humans are measurably healthier in places like the Mediterranean region and studies are proving that eating less meat plays a big part. It takes more fossil fuels and causes more pollution to produce meat than to produce most vegetable foodstuffs. Martin’s last blog post..Video Tutorial: Making Glue

By: MsMeryMac

MsMeryMac — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 19:01:44 +0000

Perhaps, but since I’ve never seen any kind of study about anything like this, I’d be hesitant to agree, just because it seems like it might make sense. There are so few hard core locavores in general that it makes it hard to study their carbon footprints in absolute numbers, though not impossible. Most people probably have combination diets – shopping at Farmer’s Markets for veggies, when in season and available, shopping at grocery stores for everything else. But researching the carbon footprint of a locavore omni, a locavore vegan, and a “junk food” or convenience vegan and comparing those to the overall raw numbers for the typical standard american diet would definitely be a great project for a PhD candidate in an environmental biology program! Of course, the numbers may be out there, or will be soon. I just haven’t seen studies like that, even as a frequent reader of Grist, etc.

So yeah, I can’t say definitively that vegan is better all the time. But then, I can’t say definitively that local is better all the time, either.

By: Siel

Siel — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 17:02:44 +0000

Hey MsMeryMac — I of course agree that many vegans are vegans because they think meat is murder, etc. And as I mentioned before, I think we all agree that not eating CAFO meat will decrease anyone’s carbon footprint. If we speak in generalities, we could probably say most vegans are primarily vegans for reasons that aren’t centrally focused on reducing their carbon footprint, and that most vegan diets have smaller carbon footprints than the typical American cheeseburger-n-fries-at-drive-thru diet.

But this post’s talking more about vegans who insist a vegan diet in itself is always greener than an omnivore’s diet — even when the omnivorian diet’s extremely eco friendly and the vegan diet may not be. As you point out, people are complicated — and thus we can’t make sweeping statements like vegan = most eco-friendly diet. Perhaps that’s a point we can agree on –

By: MsMeryMac

MsMeryMac — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 16:20:07 +0000

I get what Haley is saying. Most vegans don’t do it exclusively for the environment, but to many it’s a big issue. Siel, to use your example, a vegan wouldn’t eat their neighbors eggs that might go bad because they believe that is stealing a resource from the chicken, which humans don’t have a right to do. If you look at it from a strictly environmental standpoint, of course it would make sense to eat it. But from an animal rights standpoint, it doesn’t. I think, eventually, most vegans (and vegetarians) develop a combination of reasons for their diets, though many focus more on one aspect.

There’s no doubt that not eating animal products reduces your carbon foot print:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/06/business/worldbusiness/06iht-greencol07.4.6029437.html

and: http://www.ecostreet.com/blog/sustainable-lifestyle/2007/09/11/7-big-ways-to-reduce-your-carbon-footprint/

Those numbers come from the United Nations. Honestly, it doesn’t REALLY matter where those animal products come from. They still use feed that has to be grown and arable land. But do the types of vegan diets you can consume vary greatly (just like omnivorous diets)? Yeah, of course. Now, whether or not a local omnivorous diet is better than a vegan diet that incorporates imported and pre-packaged items, that would take a lot more research and calculation I am not equipped to do. I mean, do I enjoy a banana or a tofurkey dog at times? Yeah. (Tofurkey is made in the US, though packaged and trucked around, of course.) Do I buy MOST of my product at the Farmer’s Market? Yeah. But do I think I’m greener than people who buy all their food at WalMart? Yeah, obviously. If I felt there was no difference I wouldn’t spend the money. It probably depends a lot on how much of your diet is made up of take-out meals from Vegan Thai restaurants. (Although that does support local business – not an environmental issue, but an ethical one, to be sure.)

In conclusion, people are complicated. Personally, I consider a lot of issues relating to my community and planet when choosing my diet, transportation, housing, etc. I think most people are similar.