Locally grown food has higher carbon footprint than imported products

London Sunday Telegraph ^ | June 3, 2007 | Richard Gray

[sourcery]

• The Real 'Inconvenient Truth'
• Climate Momentum Shifting: Prominent Scientists Reverse Belief in Man-made Global Warming - Now Skeptics
• The Deniers
• New findings indicate today's greenhouse gas levels not unusual
• Global Warming as a Religion
• I Was On the Global Warming Gravy Train (By David Evans)
• GREENIE WATCH
• (Streaming video) The Great Global Warming Swindle - Documentary Film
• 'The global-warmers were bound to attack, but why are they so feeble?'

[P-40]

That Chinese pet food has a low carbon footprint; it kills animals.

[calex59]

Oh, yeah, we should just stop farming in the US altogether and let other countries supply us with food. Great idea!/SAR

[P-40]

It sounds like using slave labor would be the best option. Those slaves would consume less fossil fuel than machines and thus have a lower carbon footprint.

[Farmer Dean]

Their toothpaste is no treat either.

[elhombrelibre]

This diversity of foods from all over the world, especially produce, mean that the shopper is able to get more nutritious foods year round. It also spreads wealth to many areas of the world who otherwise have few products to export. I’ll take those tangible human benefit over the man-made, faith-based hysteria about global warming. Just look at al Gore’s girth and you know where he comes down in this trade off.

[Marie]

But, as Richard Gray discovers, produce from the other side of the world can actually have a smaller carbon footprint

And it's soooo much safer! /sarc

[Sherman Logan]

This whole issue is idiotic. The cost and carbon footprint of transportation is generally among the least important factors in the food supply.

[Marie]

*whispering*

I smell a troll.

[Political Junkie Too]

Those slaves would consume less fossil fuel than machines and thus have a lower carbon footprint.

And then harvest their organs, and mulch the rest as fertilizer for future generations of crops. 100% reusability leaves no carbon footprint at all.

-PJ

[P-40]

Their toothpaste is no treat either.

But *it does* kill the germs that cause bad breath. :)

[sourcery]

I smell a troll.

They make the best targets when one is well-armed with the truth.

[donna]

There is a smaller carbon footprint because the peons just pee on the veggies to water them.

[Lancey Howard]

Hollywood should do the right thing and stop eating entirely.

[LibLieSlayer]

“It sounds like using slave labor would be the best option. Those slaves would consume less fossil fuel than machines and thus have a lower carbon footprint.”

Internment work camps for dims and al qaeda... they would get along smashingly. We can extend this into road work, public works, grow our own crops with "low carbon footprint" slave labor and hildebeast would finally be telling the truth about hard times when she says, “I knows wut you talkin’ ‘bout”!

LLS

[luckystarmom]

I like locally grown food because it supports people in my community.

[tflabo]

Why Ben and Jerry's cows belching contribute to global warming. Hilarious!

http://talk.livedaily.com/showthread.php?p=11214059

[TheDon]

Save the environment,
kill an environmentalist.

[Cicero]

It’s all relative. There was more pollution in England and the rest of Europe in the 18th century than there is today.

The Environmentalists will never be happy until they have killed off most of the population (except themselves) and have the rest of the population working, tilling the soil by hand (except themselves).