If it’s really that simple, that singular, and involves the environment. It’s arguably wrong. Time to piss off the loco vores

Filed under General, science

There’s an inverse relationship between technology, modern society and  return to a time that exists in Disney movies. Happy serfs one and all:)   What is it that drives those with the  least practical skills to want to go back to a lifestyle were they would be necessary for survival?    They planning on taking up the yoke as it were?

Anyway  nearly all attempts to take a massively complex system and put an apparently “common sense” reading on it  doesn’t quite  work.    Yes transit does use up resources but if you take the examples in this piece it’s ofter less than  forcing the local climate to support it. E.g if you could only eat that which  grows native to your locale it would totally suck. Suck as  in the malnutrition , scurvy and other fun  atavistic maladies sense.

The Food Miles Mistake: Saving the planet by eating New Zealand apples – Reason Magazine

Food miles are supposed to be a simple way to gauge food’s impact on climate change.

…Local food production does not always produce fewer greenhouse gas
emissions. For example, the 2005 DEFRA study found that British tomato
growers emit 2.4 metric tons of carbon dioxide for each ton of tomatoes
grown compared to 0.6 tons of carbon dioxide for each ton of Spanish
tomatoes….

No related posts.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*

« Back to text comment

Switch to our mobile site