Comments on: Processed, imported vegetarian proteins not greener than local meat

By: Siel

Siel — Thu, 15 Apr 2010 05:36:59 +0000

Tony — I agree the issues are extremely complex. The debates you bring up remind me of some of the green energy issues we’re having in Calif. (i.e. should we build wind farms in areas where endangered species live?)….

By: Tony

Tony — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 23:12:50 +0000

What I think your article – and the other comments – showed very well was that there are no “simple” answers to an incredibly complex issue. Even “Go local” can have a price if it involves destroying a habitat to provide food.

Here in the UK we have a lot of issues of this nature, having somewhat less space than you. Not quite food related, but there is a plan to build a barrage across a major river estuary. It will provide quite a lot of “green” enery – and possibly destroy an important habitat for wading and migrating birds.

Some of our finest grassland habitats only exist because they are used to graze sheep, reared for meat. Should we plough (or plow) those grasslands up to grow vegetables?

The balance is almost impossible to find. Pollen’s mantra is one of the best. If we ate proper meat, and less of it, we would not require (as much) intensively reared livestock. By proper meat I mean that there is more to a cow than prime steak. All the cheap cuts and the offal should form a much larger part of our buying habits than they do.

By: Siel

Siel — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 00:08:58 +0000

peterb -- CSA programs and farmers' markets help a lot with the cost issue. Get it at the source and cut out the middle man, and you can eat a lot better and even save money, if you cook (vs buying processed crap). More people are eating sustainably, even on a food stamp budget.

By: peterb

peterb — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 00:24:13 +0000

typo in my message: “who doesn’t address the issue of how we make a sustainable diet affordable….”

By: peterb

peterb — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 00:23:14 +0000

This study also helps to point out the other weakness what, for lack of a better term, I’ll call a “slow food diet”: it’s all very well to say “Eat food, not to much, mostly vegetables,” but the truth is that to eat that way _and_ to eat _well_ requires substantial amounts of money (A while ago I read a great article by someone who decided to eat vegetarian on a poverty salary, as an experiment. Surprise! They ended up eating mostly corn pone.)

So I have very little patience for anyone who wants to lecture on the way people “should” eat who doesn’t address the issue, and address it in more than a sophomoric “Well, if we just eliminate all beef subsidies, fresh delicious vegetables will spring up in every garden from San Diego to Bangor, Maine!” sort of way.