Wanna save 1.1 million barrels of oil? Every week?

[trof]

From "Animal, Vegetable, Mineral...A Year of Food Life":
"Americans put almost as much fossil fuel into our refrigerators as our cars. We’re consuming about 400 gallons of oil a year per citizen – about 17% of our nation’s energy use – for agriculture, a close second to our vehicular use. Tractors, combines, harvesters, irrigation, sprayers, tillers, balers, and other equipment all use petroleum. Even bigger gas guzzlers on the farm are not the machines, but so-called inputs. Synthetic fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides use oil and natural gas as their starting materials, and in their manufacturing. More than a quarter of all farming energy goes into synthetic fertilizers.


But getting the crop from seed to harvest takes only one fifth of the total oil used for our food. The lion’s share is consumed during the trip from the farm to your plate. Each food item in a typical U.S. meal has traveled an average of 1500 miles. In addition to direct transport, other fuel-thirsty steps include processing (drying, milling, cutting, sorting, baking), packaging, warehousing and refrigeration. Energy calories consumed by production, packaging and shipping far outweigh the energy calories we receive from the food.

A quick way to improve food-related fuel economy would be to buy a quart of motor oil and drink it. More palatable options are available. If every U.S. citizen ate just one meal a week (any meal) composed of locally and organically raised meats and produce, we would reduce our country’s oil consumption by over 1.1 million barrels of oil every week. That’s not gallons, but barrels. Small changes in buying habits can make big differences. Becoming a less energy-dependent nation may just need to start with a good breakfast. "
http://www.animalvegetablemiracle.com/about%20the%20boo...

[Bob Dobbs]

1. Wanna feed all the starving in the world.

Stop wasting grain to produce animals to slaughter.

This would cure most morbid illnesses and cut pollution drastically in one fell swoop.

[hokies4ever]

2. Agreed*

*I say while eating some tasty barbecue. :rofl:

[Bob Dobbs]

3. Carnivorism is a tough addiction to kick.

The environmental and health impact of it will be impossible to ignore eventually.

I've been a vegan since 1975 and I'm still snowboarding and mountain biking at 53, so it hasn't caused me to be malnourished.

[Oregone]

6. But replacing Carnivorism with Cannibalism can also help kick the addiction, reduce hunger, and

control population. :)



Im not a vegan personally. I was raised with farmed milk and eggs (farmed by my family), and fresh salmon from the river. We used the manure (from our milk producing pets) as fertilizer for our garden we lived off of. Besides the fresh salmon, Ive never ate any meat of other kind (farmed or wild).

Im actually not against carnivorism, but farmed meat seems to be drastically wasteful. I tend to like the idea of hunted meat (being that farmed grains are not wasted to produce it), so long as man does so in a way that does not alter the environmental balance. Our track record in that regard is terrible. Even fishing is starting to take a tough toll. We can not un-invasively use our environment to live this way anymore, with this amount of population and growth.

[truedelphi]

8. What happens when no one eats cows or chickens or

Turkeys?

I think a lot of naive people think that the farmers will continue to feed and care for the livestock, and thus continue to support the ecology of that lifestyle - the meadows, the brush and forests. That ain't gonna happen - cows and even chickens and turkeys are expensive as pets.

The anti-meat eaters keep mentioning all the methane that cows produce - but I'd like to see the numbers on how that methane is offset by the grasses, shrubs and trees necessary for the farmer's pastureland.

If the cows go, I foresee all of Califonia becoming one big vineyard and casino land.

And the Oxygen that is thus lost to the world is probably equivalent to at least one small rainforest!!

[Bob Dobbs]

11. Once you stop producing animals for food that problem goes away.

Of course farmers won't continue to produce cows if we stop eating them. That's silly.

The waste comes from feeding grain to cows, which is a very inefficient conversion of resources to final food.

I'm not sure what shrubs and trees have to do with cattle production.

Do some research on this and get back to me.

[truedelphi]

32. The cows need pasture. The pasture consists of land

That is maintained in a very old fashioned way.

In a week or two I will have video that I am making that will show people on DU what I am talking about. I know that many on DU live in the city and don't realize how tremendously sterile the properties that the newest class of vineyards are becoming once the property is developed for grapes.

Pasture land with its lushness of diversity, the trees, the grasses, the brush and shrubs and weeds, does three important things:
1) It provides fodder for the cattle as they graze.
2) It allows the wild life to have a habitat. The deer, badger, skunks, lizards, snakes, birds, coyotes, etc are able to live inside an eco-system.
Contrast that with the barren vineyards - miles and miles of nothing but bare earth with the spikes and wire trellises and the little bits of green leaf and grape. The most up-to-date method of claiming the land for grape vines means no habitat for the wild - after all, a good vintner wants maximum production and they can't be having those nasty birds and rabbits showing things up to munch on the plantings.
The older vineyards are slightly better, as the older producers are more ecological in their approach, but the newer vintners' approach is very barren. One local sports writer has been saying that the deer in california are decreasing by about 15% a year - due to the stripping away of habitat to convert it to grape vines. So far, he hasn't offered statistics about the other forms of wild life - but I will tell you this - the vineyards use a lot of pesticide and when a monocrop using so much poison dominates entire Counties in California, it is no wonder that the bees are disappearing.
Sorry for all my words - that is why I am develloping a video. Five minutes of seeing th emiles of nothing but the most barren wine wasteland will be more effective that a million of my words. No birds to be seen, and certainly no other wild life either.
3) The pastures with all their flora produce oxygen. Which is what we need to breathe. The acres and acres of bare soil with the little wire trellises and the little spikes of grape vine can not equal the tremendous boon to the Earth that the pasture lands offer us.

As far as the animals eating grain, people in the anti-cow camp should realize that for the past several decades, the problem with hunger in the world has been that of distribution, not whether or not there is enough grain to go around. In fact, we pay people great sums of money to NOT grow food and instead let the fields lie fallow. It would be far better to be against the governments of the world spending such huge amounts of their countries' wealth to purchase armanents and to fund militias. Such awful purchases need to be stopped. If that money was diverted to feeding the world's poor, distribution methods could be stream lined in short order, and no one would be going to bed hungry.

[JerseygirlCT]

18. Well, I think the biggest roadblock is the idea that it must be

all or nothing.

Cutting back is better than not doing anything at all.

I couldn't go completely veggie - frankly I don't like veggies enough! But I'm also not a big meat-eater. I don't fret about the little I do eat - the name isn't important.

But if we all cut back a bit, I think we'd see improvements!

[patriotvoice]

7. Achieve balance

1. Individuals should consciously reduce their meat consumption
2. Consume a variety of meat sources
3. Raise on field, not feed

Eating daily -- and in some cases super-daily -- is simply not a natural human diet. While the best configuration depends upon the person, reducing the actual number of meat-laden meals will help curb the impact.

The introduction of bison, deer, and ostrich into our diets will help relieve stress on the already strained beef, pork, and chicken industries. A pheasant from the field is much tastier than a battery cage chicken, to boot.

Animals can sustain themselves: let them. The mass production instinct is the only driving force to keep these animals on feed. Force less consumption by simply not feeding them; let them graze in their own time. I recognize there's no profit potential there, and that's exactly the point.

[trof]

13. Grass fed beef.

They're herbivores and grass is their natural feed.
It was man's bright idea to fatten them up quickly on 'cheap' corn.

[knitter4democracy]

21. Bison and lamb, too.

The local lamb and bison in our freezer (grilling lamb steaks today!) are grass-fed and from small farms I've visited to see for myself how they treat their animals.

[OnionPatch]

4. I loved that book!

It was really interesting to read how Kingsolver and her family ate local for a whole year. The good thing is, most people need not go to the lengths they went to. Even just growing a vegetable garden in your backyard instead of grass has to help some, I would think.

[trof]

14. My daughter told me about it.

Fascinating and inspirational.

[wildeyed]

16. I was inspired by that book to start gardening more seriously.

I have always enjoyed gardening as a hobby, but Kingsolver's book plus the ridiculous cost of food has motivated me to start raising vegetables more seriously.

There are some interesting articles posting in the gardening forum on converting suburban yards, abandoned urban lots and even roof tops into vegetable producing areas for both fun and profit.

[nichomachus]

5. I would, but I don't have the room for it. Where would I put it?

[Melissa G]

9. Victory gardens were also an answer and could help solve a few problems

that we are having now. Higher gas prices, higher food prices, a cultural disconnect between land and consumer. Gardening can be a social event and older folks are often better at it than younger folks, so it becomes an intergenerational activity.So many more benefits...



Victory gardens, also called war gardens or food gardens for defense, were vegetable, fruit and herb gardens planted at private residences in the United States, Canada, and United Kingdom during World War I and World War II to reduce the pressure on the public food supply brought on by the war effort. In addition to indirectly aiding the war effort these gardens were also considered a civil "morale booster" — in that gardeners could feel empowered by their contribution of labor and rewarded by the produce grown. Making victory gardens became a part of daily life on the home front.
snip
Amid regular rationing of canned food in Britain, a poster campaign ("Plant more in '44!") encouraged the planting of Victory Gardens by nearly 20 million Americans. These gardens produced up to 40 percent of all the vegetable produce consumed nationally.

It was emphasized to home front urbanites and suburbanites that the produce from their gardens would help to lower the price of vegetables needed by the US War Department to feed the troops, thus saving money that could be spent elsewhere on the military: "Our food is fighting," one poster read.

snip
Victory gardens were planted in backyards and on apartment-building rooftops, with the occasional vacant lot "commandeered for the war effort!" and put to use as a cornfield or a squash patch. During World War II, sections of lawn were publicly plowed for plots in Hyde Park, London to publicize the movement. In New York City, the lawns around vacant "Riverside" were devoted to victory gardens, as were portions of San Francisco's Golden Gate Park.

snip
The Fenway Victory Gardens in the Back Bay Fens of Boston, Massachusetts and the Dowling Community Garden in Minneapolis, Minnesota, remain active as the last surviving public examples from World War II. Most plots in the Fenway Victory Gardens now feature flowers instead of vegetables while the Dowling Community Garden retains it's focus on vegetables.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victory_garden

[knitter4democracy]

20. I was thinking this, too.

We seriously expanded our garden this year, and what I would give to be able to have chickens (against the zoning *sigh*). We also get a local CSA's share delivered every week with local eggs, too, and I found another local source for amazing FinnCross wool (processed not far away) for spinning. In our freezer, we only have local meats, and in our fridge, we only have local eggs. As soon as the produce starts getting delivered, we'll have mostly local produce.

I'm thinking of getting a flour mill, too. I know some farmers in the area who would sell me good red wheat.

[TheWraith]

10. Alright, now let's see what that totals out to in real numbers.

1.1 million a week is about 157,000 per day, or about 0.7 percent of our national oil requirements. Meaning a grand total savings of 6 cents per person, per day.

This is, I think, the definition of a "feel good" effort that has little to no real impact on oil demand.

[Bob Dobbs]

12. So continuing to ship food from around the world is cool with you, then.

What is your real impact solution to the oil problem?

[trof]

15. Yeah, like my 2000 mile spuds.

We were at a grocery store yesterday.
Potatoes were on the list.
I picked up a 10 lb. bag.
We've become very conscious about supporting local growers, so I turned the bag over to see who the supplier was.
Some farm in Simi Valley, California!
That's over 2000 miles away.
This is crazy.

We live in a farming community.
We're surrounded by farms.
Don't some of our farmers grow potatoes?
Are they shipping our spuds to China?
What gives?

I picked up a bag from a different pile.
Monte Vista, Colorado.
Well, that's only about 1400 miles from here, so I picked the CO spuds.

The yellow onions came from Monterrey, CA.
I guess there are no farmers in Baldwin County who know how to grow onions.

I wonder just how much fuel it took to get those basic foods from field to processor/packager to regional distribution warehouse to local warehouse to store?

[wildeyed]

17. This op-ed from NYT published awhile back explains it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/01/opinion/01hedin.html?th&emc=th

IF you’ve stood in line at a farmers’ market recently, you know that the local food movement is thriving, to the point that small farmers are having a tough time keeping up with the demand.

But consumers who would like to be able to buy local fruits and vegetables not just at farmers’ markets, but also in the produce aisle of their supermarket, will be dismayed to learn that the federal government works deliberately and forcefully to prevent the local food movement from expanding. And the barriers that the United States Department of Agriculture has put in place will be extended when the farm bill that House and Senate negotiators are working on now goes into effect.

[trof]

23. And local vs 'imported' organics.

Barbara Kingsolver tells this story in the book.

Local organic farmers had gotten local (Virginia) chain grocers to agree to buy their tomatoes when they came in season. Weeks (or maybe months) later the tomatoes came ripe and the farmer's rep went around to take orders. Every store she went to said "Not this week, maybe next week."

WHAT?
Ripe tomatoes don't 'wait' till next week.
After sleuthing around she found that some huge organic farms in California had been able to offer their tomatoes at slightly cheaper prices due to 'economies of scale' (I guess) and cheaper labor.
In spite of the added shipping costs.
So the local farmers were basically screwed.
But how much oil did it take to get those west coast tomatoes to the west coast?

P.S. Rather than see the fruits of their labors rot, the farmers were able to give them to local food banks and needy people.
But they lost any money they would have made on the entire crop, plus all the money and time they spent to bring that crop in.
:grr:

[wildeyed]

26. I remember reading somewhere that the shipping costs for food are all subsidized

by the government, although I don't have a link so I could be mistaken. But if I remember correctly and you already pay for the shipping with taxes, then there is no financial incentive to grow food close to where it is consumed. Would make more sense to tax food that needs to be shipped long distances more to discourage the fossil fuel waste of the shipping.

Some school districts agree to buy a certain amount of local produce for their lunch programs. It would be nice to get more programs like that into existence. The local farmers would be guaranteed a market and could expand their production accordingly.

In my part of the world, you have to get up before first light if you want to score some locally grown organic asparagus at the local farmers market. You basically have to wait until someone dies to get a good CSA share. My answer has been to grow more of my own food, but it is time consuming and there is definitely a learning curve involved. It is not the solution for everyone.

[Ikonoklast]

30. Shipping costs for food are paid for by either the grower or user

The federal government has no say whatsoever in the costs incurred in shipping food, from farm to wholesaler, processor, or end user such as a retail outlet.

The USDA does track the costs of perishable fruit and vegetables, but does not in any way interfere in market forces that decide shipping rates.

[knitter4democracy]

22. I only get Michigan potatoes anymore.

We have great muck farms not far from here with great potatoes. There's one not far from my mom's house with amazing reds.

[TheWraith]

33. Yes, because there are ONLY two answers to any question! Yay for false dichotomies!

When you're willing to engage in civilized debate, perhaps others will be too.

[JackRiddler]

19. Brilliant.

So don't make any moves to cut oil consumption since any one given measure is only going to be 0.7 percent, here or there. Or less. That could never add up, could it?

[Zynx]

24. Economics is all about marginal activity, Save a percent here and a percent there suddenly we are

talking a big impact.

[RedCappedBandit]

25. A bunch of small changes can have a huge impact in the long run. nt

[wildeyed]

27. Everything counts.

Every small savings, every bad habit changed, every little bit adds up. :)

[chelaque liberal]

28. We also have to re-learn eating seasonally.

People have come to expect to be able to get strawberries, melons, tomatoes, etc. year round, which of course has to be shipped from another hemisphere. And then the quality is so poor I can't understand why they want it.

[chelaque liberal]

29. This Organic Life by Joan Dye Gussow

is another excellent read.

[Indenturedebtor]

31. Hey what about Testube meat? Link below -

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0621-03.htm

How about we get all of our meat from the lab eh? :shrug:

I'd eat a grown steak. Why the hell not?

Soilent green anyone?