Locavore Analysis

minimize ecological footprints and gain awareness behind the truth of our food routes. Presently, it is very easy to get a variety of different flavours in one supermarket; trinidadian eggplants, chinese bitter melon, hungarian hot peppers and many other delectable products from around the world, but what many don’t realize is that it takes on average 1,500 to 3,000 miles and 250,000

Locavores consume only locally grown foods in an effort to reduce their carbon footprints and lose weight, among other reasons. The popularity of locavorism has grown dramatically over the last decade, and its merits are extolled by scientists and ordinary consumers alike. The locavore movement seems to be indisputably beneficial to the environment, the economy, and to consumer health, yet close examination of its common tenets reveals issues which should be taken into account before beginning a locavore diet.

Saving the planet is a topic that is taken seriously by a huge part of this planet’s population. James McWilliams argument, “The Locavore Myth: Why Buying from Nearby Farmer Won’t Save the Planet,” explains why people need to buy food from people other than the local farmers. He believes that the focus of the locavore movement on transportation is wrong because the real problem lies within the energy-hogging factors in food production. McWilliams also went on to explain that another mistake that the locavore movement made was how food miles were calculated. He believes that a truck with 2,000 apples driving 2,000 miles would consume the same amount of fuel as a truck that carried 50 apples to a local shop only 50 miles away. James McWilliams states that “The critical measure here is not food miles but apples per gallon.” He also argues that taking meat out of a person’s diet would cut down on the carbon footprint of his or her dinner because it takes less energy to bring plants, rather than meat, to the table.

In her article she writes about how the earth is being affected by all the pollutions and greenhouse gases that are being emitted. She explains about how the food industry contributes by “Most produce is shipped many miles before it is sold to consumers, and shipping our food for long distances is costly in both the amount of fossil fuel it uses and the greenhouse gases it produces” (93). This adds to her argument that buying local will help reduce the amount of air pollution from transporting food. In an article by Environmental Board the authors claim “If you buy locally, you protect and make the environment more sustainable because you don’t have to truck the food thousands of miles across the country or import it from other countries which takes a lot of energy. It is a lot better for the climate and region” (1). This information provides evidence to support her theory in which buying local can help reduce harmful

The growing locavore movement suggests that local food is key for healthy eating and community growth. One would imagine that the closer the source of one’s food is from, the healthier and more sustainable it is, right? However, this is not the case. In the set of locavore articles, the authors provide information to show that the locavore movement brings about issues involving inefficiency, energy use, and impracticality.

Michael Pollan the author of Omnivore 's Dilemma discusses and asks, “what should we have for dinner?” He attempts to answer one of the pressing questions of sustainability in today 's society, to save money or to save the planet, and how? Pollan talks about how humans are omnivores and we have the choice to eat whatever we want, no matter the health and sustainability implications of our decisions. Pollan discusses three main food chains, industrial (corn), organic, and hunter/gatherer. He analyzes each food chain, learning eating industrial is basically eating corn, and goes into the complex issues

Locavores are consumers of locally grown or produced products. Eating fresh foods from their local farmer’s market can improve income twice as much for its economy. This is important because people give away their money to companies that could instead be giving it to benefit their community. Gogoi Pallavi the author of The Rise of the Locavore states, “It’s a movement that is gradually reshaping the business of growing...local food movement has already accomplished something almost no

What am I exactly eating? Where does our food come from? Why should I care? “The Omnivore’s Dilemma” may forever change the way you think about food. I enjoyed Mr. Pollan’s book, “The Omnivore’s Dilemma” and learned a great deal of information. Pollan’s book is a plea for us to stop and think for a moment about our whole process of eating. Pollan sets out to corn fields and natural farms, goes hunting and foraging, all in the name of coming to terms with where food really comes from in modern America and what the ramifications are for the eaters, the eaten, the economy and the environment. The results are far more than I expected them to be.

The locavore movement has become increasingly popular over the last decade. Locavores are people who prefer to eat food that is locally grown and doesn’t travel long distances before getting to their plates. This thought process is slowly changing the way people eat and the ideals people consider when choosing food to eat. Along with this fresh perspective on where our food comes from, the movement provides a innovative ideal towards what is sustainable and what is not sustainable. While the definition of local is dependent on the buyer the effect is the same. The locavore movement has a positive impact on the local communities through improving the income and number of local farms that fosters good communities, and increasing the nutritional value of food eaten.

In third grade, my classmates and I hopped off the bus on a September day. Happiness filled my body. I could not wait to experience our first field trip: the farmer’s market. I remember buying a small, shiny, round apple. Taking a big juicy bite from the crisp apple blew my mind. I remember exclaiming to my teacher about how good it was, and he explained how the apple had been picked that day making the apple taste better and how it had been picked nearby which supported our local farms. Coming home that day, I asked my mom if we could go again to buy our food there. However, I am not the only one. The locavore movement has rooted itself across the nation; nevertheless, it is an individual's choice. Becoming a true locavore takes lots of

Eating food produced within a hundred-mile radius has never been a prominent concern historically, though there has been a recent increase in this trend. Those that are rigorously set on this new ideology are being labeled “locavores”. Christophe Pelletier, being a proficient individual on the topic of food production had an educated opinion on the locavore’s predicted way of life. Pelletier’s, “The Locavore’s Dilemma”, provides multiple examples to support his belief that informing every resident of the carbon footprint their food contains would realistically carryout the locavore’s ideology to a more viable agriculture. His blog post on this ideology goes into depth about the physical and economical destruction they would provoke. This would include: the possibility of famine, lack of needed nutritional supplements,

The locavore movement encourages people in towns to consume more locally grown food, by society consuming locally grown food transportation is cut down which helps better the environment. Since locally grown food is produce that is cultivated in the community transportation is down to a minimum which is a blessing for the environment. “ Eating local is better for air quality and pollution than eating organic. “ ( Source A ) less transportation use helps lessen the pollution in the air which in turn helps provide the community with cleaner fresher air. “ The move towards local food for all its trendiness highlights one of the problematic pieces of the modern food economy : the increasing reliance on foods shipped halfway round the world. “ ( Source E ) The

It’s no secret, Americans love their processed, energy-rich foods. And undeniably, this love affair has led to an obesity epidemic. In spite of the evidence against processed food, however, there are some who believe the problem may hold the key to the solution. David Freedman, author of “How Junk Food Could End Obesity,” criticizes Michael Pollan for his argument in support of unprocessed, local foods due its impracticality. Freedman’s criticism is based on the idea that “It makes a lot more sense to look for small, beneficial changes in food than it does to hold out for big changes in what people eat that have no realistic chance of happening” (Freedman Sec. 1). He contends that processed foods already play a big part in our diets, so instead of trying to expand the wholesome food business, we should try to make processed foods healthier. Freedman’s argument, however, overlooks many negative effects of processed foods and conventional farming. Michael Pollan’s wholesome food movements takes into account not only the obesity problem, but also the quality of the environment and the rights of farmers. Although Pollan’s solution to obesity may not seem the most efficient or time effective, the trades offs it provides in terms of environmental sustainability and the well-being of farmers outweigh the loss of efficiency.

Nations are judged and measured by their production and selling of goods and services. Not only has increased consumerism resulted in ecological imbalance, it is also depleting earth’s natural resources, which in turn is creating an environmental crisis. One of the biggest products being consumed is food. Rapidly growing world’s population requires increased food production. Author Anna Lappe does an excellent job expounding on the impact that food production and distribution has on the environment. Lappe (2015) argues that modern practices of food production directly contribute to air pollution and increases carbon dioxide emissions (par. 11). Crop production uses an absurd amount of land, artificial fertilizer, and harmful pesticides that seriously pollutes the environment and threatens young children and wildlife species. Author Sandra Steingraber (2015) also argues that increased consumerism has led to a high usage of harmful chemicals to produce products for consumers (par.

Transportation is the number one thing we consumers do that harms the environment. Transportation causes the highest amount of environmental damage overall - nearly half of the toxic air pollution and more than a quarter of the greenhouse gases traceable to household consumption. Over time, however, sales of trucks, vans and SUV's went from 16% market share to over 50%. One big auto manufacturer even shelved their work of the last three years, spent updating their most popular selling economy car, so they could spend the money getting SUVs to market faster.