Many of us, understandably, like to be assured that our food has been kept safe from germ-transmitting contact.  The problem with this concern is that our food industry—and particularly fast food companies—have responded to our worries by wrapping and rewrapping all our food individually.  All that packaging takes energy and resources—and more than 70% of those resources wind up in the landfill.  Adopting a policy to minimize the purchase of wasteful packaging can reduce our per capita energy usage.

Organic food production is largely a biodiversity matter.  Genetically engineered produce and the use of chemical fertilizers, pesticides (to kill off invasive pests), and herbicides (to eradicate troublesome weeds) has reduced the genetic diversity of the vegetation in our fields and has made toxic chemicals part of our environment.  Many of these chemicals are safe in the short term—and they certainly make farming easier, more productive per acre, and less energy intensive—but there are some concerns about the possible long-term effects of these agricultural methods.  Privileging organic foods—that is, foods which are not genetically modified or grown with the aid of chemical fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides—reduces the amount of toxic chemicals and promotes biodiversity in our ecosystem.

Estimates vary, but generally, the food on the average consumer’s plates has traveled between 1,100 and 2,500 miles.  (Springfield farmers, alas, do not grow our bananas, whip up our Snickers bars, or harvest our coffee beans.)  All of those miles lead to many tons of carbon entering the atmosphere by truck, train, boat, or plane, and a good many of those tons could be avoided by eating seasonal and local foods.  True, this commitment can be difficult because the academic year does not coincide with the growing season in this area, but smart food policies are still very possible.

Some critics of the local food effort will point out that, by some calculations, most of the carbon involved in producing our food is generated well before that food ever leaves the farm.  No question about it, a meat-heavy diet takes a heavier toll on the environment since large amounts of animal feed have to be grown and transported to the animal farms.  And cows eat a lot:  about 15 pounds of feed and 30 pounds of forage are needed to produce 1 measly pound of beef.  Committing your house to a diet rich in vegetable entrees—some environmentalists recommend a diet of meat once or twice a week—has significant environmental consequences.