[hillsidedigger]

Most food should be delivered no further than it can be carried.

[americandream]

The modellers of sub-prime derivatives trading thought they were smart and look where that got us. Western taxpayers now carrying the can for these smart boys.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'J')D works under the assumption that "peak-oilers" are idiots, he is smart, and agriculture will always depend on "green revolution" hybrids and inputs.

A post-peak closed-loop agrarian agriculture system depends on recycling food waste (during production and at the table such as food scraps etc.) into the soil, composting to prevent oxidation and especially the return of nitrogen and other bodiy solids (wink wink wink).

Currently meat is slaughtered in giant industrial plants run on fuel and shipped in refrigerated trains and trucks and then processed into frozen meals that packaged and refrigerated at great expense. He doesn't measure this. Industrial agriculture depends on timed crops that all mature the same time. Has anyone every been near a cabbage or broccoli field after harvest? The waste is copious? Vegetables are heavy, calorie-light, and fragile and so require refrigeration he does not measure. They have shallow roots and ca not mine deep nutrients.

JD doesn't consider post-harvest production that occurs off-site, so he doesn't measure the cost to refrigerate trucks, supermarket shells, or the shrink and waste that occurs in store prep room--lettuce heads are cleaned up and the bad stuff is sent off the the municipal waste stream at great expense. Canning and freezing and bagging etc etc are part of the energy cost of getting industrial food to us.

It goes on and on. The guy thinks that Quorntm grows on trees.

[kublikhan]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('americandream', 'L')ocal buying seeks to minimise foods impact on oil demand by first bringin the production home. The next step once its home is the delivery process which kk seems to conflate with who knows what. I'm still mystified by his point if its intended to go beyond the mere vagaries of balancing ones books, instead taking issue with the desire of local buying to tweak oil usage down to the minimal, profit and loss accounting aside. It seems that way to me. Why on a Peak Oil website however. Strange person.

[americandream]

I think you needed to make it clear in the way you presented this forum item that localisation was not being attacked so much as its present inefficiencies. Really, it is a food miles issue but with the added qualifier that the current localisation initiatives are not efficient due to their non-centralised distribution infrastructure. To simply state that sending a container of beans from China is more efficient overall fails to take account of the fact that current localisation whilst extremely wasteful distriburtion wise, is advantageous in as much as it removes China from the loop (long term sustainability) and still presents opportunities for further tweaking down to an absolute minimum. As things stand, the China link is already maximised and yet we still have a massive discrepancy, remote dependance.

[kublikhan]

Yes, I was not attacking localization itself but rather the current inefficiencies of local farmers markets. The term food miles does not adequately capture the true fossil fuel cost of transporting the food. Pound gallons does a better job of that.

So yes, local farms and markets can be reconfigured to be more efficient. However if local farms and farmer's markets are reconfigured to be centralized to take advantage of larger economies of scale, would that not turn them into Big AG that many other posters in this thread have complained about? No longer would they be farmer Ted who you could walk down to and help dig the potatoes by hand. No longer would there be small neighborhood stores that inspire community loyalty. Instead we would have giant farms and faceless megastores. Similar situation to what we have now, just with the farms closer to the cities. I guess it's a tradeoff. Are you willing to pay the higher fuel cost for the personal touch of a small local farmer, artisan and market? Or do you want the lower fuel cost of the highly efficient corporate machine with it's faceless megastores?

Also, if the current food distribution system has fuel consumption in the range of thousandths of a gallon per pound of food delivered, and the current consumer has fuel consumption in the range of tenths of a gallon per pound delivered, will the consumer not feel the squeeze of high fuel costs much much sooner than we have to start worrying about food miles? Would we not be making much more progress in addressing oil consumption by looking at the component that is consuming 30x as much oil on a per pound basis(ie, the end consumer)? To me, it seems food miles addresses food security issues more than fuel consumption issues(ie, it is better to rely on locally grown food so you don't have food riots when world food markets seize up).

[americandream]

Personally, I am less concerned with the facelessness of my food outlet (I rather prefer my anonymity at times) and more concerned at my dependence on a source of food half way across the world, especially in a world which has made an almighty cockup with recent half-assed attempts at economic deregulation.

What I want is my food sourced as close to me as is feasible without running the risk of depending on a fickle bureaucrat in China (or wherever) who may get the head staggers one morning and decide that he's sending my melons to his unhappy masses (which is fair enough) rather than to me. Localisation for me starts with local security, on which platform which we then develop efficiencies, fuel, economic etc, etc; faceless or otherwise.

[kublikhan]

That makes sense. But personally, I think food security is a more serious issue in a poor food importing country like Bangladesh. And rich food exporting countries like the USA and New Zealand are at less risk.

A recent trend has started in rich food importing countries to snatch up productive farmland in poor countries. This food would then be shipped directly back to the importing country, bypassing the world market all together. They don't seem too concerned about food miles. Rather, they seem more concerned with securing sufficient food resources for themselves.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'L')ibyan leader Moammar Gadhafi calls it the “new feudalism.” Groups representing peasant farmers call it “land grabs.” The United Nations literature dispersed at this week's UN food summit in Rome calls it “direct foreign investment.” That's not exactly what the UN called it a year and a half ago, when record-high food prices triggered riots in dozens of countries and threatened famine in some of the poorest nations. Then, Jacques Diouf, the director-general of the UN's Food and Agricultural Organization, said the global farmland rush could be interpreted as a form of “neo-colonialism.”

Whatever the name, the race by foreign investors to lock up food supplies by collecting productive farmland outside their own countries has become the hot-button issue at the food summit. The watchdog groups fear the land-buying spree violates the rights of poor farmers, who may be thrown off the land they cannot prove they own, and is contributing to local food shortages. In most cases, the farms' production is exported directly back to the investors' home country, bypassing the international food-commodity markets. A recent Grain report said the farm deals amount to “the siphoning of fertile and probably contested agricultural lands to rich foreigners.

[americandream]

I beg to differ. I seem to recollect joe public being reassured before the export of our industries to China and the subsequent impoverishment of our workforce, that history had come to an end. Look at us today. Bailing out these spongers so as they might be able to lend us money to purchase goods from the industries we gave up. Hah! What a joke.

A country is not merely about dollars and cents. Its about the infrastructure my tax has helped construct, about quality of life, security and a reasonable degree of self reliance, bearing in mind that were one to not take care of one's own patch, the fella next door wont. Like I said, localisation is a good first step in bringin back to our countries some small degree of self reliance in the event TSHTF fast. Bring the industries back and then lets make them fuel efficient.

edit: and when we're done subsidising those Chinese suckers, maybe we can look at acquiring more land like they are.

[Ludi]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('americandream', '
')edit: and when we're done subsidising those Chinese suckers, maybe we can look at acquiring more land like they are.

[frankthetank]

Replacing long haul trucking in this country with rail would save huge amounts of fuel. Rail per ton is suppose to use 70% less fuel then truck. Shipping by my calculation uses even less fuel then rail. For what i figure, for every ton, 1 gallon of fuel will push a ship 556 miles (pretty crazy!) and it will push a railroad car 436 miles...although like i mentioned, those ships figures are iffy and probably vary a lot depending on ship, conditions, currents, winds, etc...

Maybe keep trucking to x amount of miles 50? 100? 200? Personal transportation should be banned...the auto will have to die...maybe allow scooters and electrics... I'm talking years out here, not tomorrow.

[kublikhan]

And don't forget, you can reduce the fuel use of those ships even more if you put some kites on them.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')kySails is a new alternative propulsion system for ships. This innovative system consists of a large automated towing kite designed to significantly decrease ships' operation costs. The kite has a nominal power of up to 5,000 kW (about 6,800 HP), and is intended to lower fuel consumption rates by 10%-35% on average, and by up to 50% in optimal wind conditions. . No additional personnel is needed to operate this technology, as the system is fully automatic. The christening of “Beluga SkySails”, the world's first cargo ship equipped with a SkySails-System, took place on December 15th, 2007.

Since wind-conditions are not always sufficient, the SkySails system is designed to function as a supplementary power source, in addition to the ship's engine. SkySails consists of a towing kite, a control system, a launch and recovery system and a wind-optimized routing system. The parafoil kite is constructed out of high-strength, weatherproof textiles, and is designed in such a way that it can achieve optimal aerodynamic efficiency at any wind speed. The SkySails system also improves the ship's safety and performance on water as it damps the waves so that the ship suffers from less slamming and torsion forces. In addition, as a result of smoother sailing, the ship's "life" is extended.

[americandream]

kk seems to think we do 'cos the Chinese, Indians and everyone else is getting a slice of Africa.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('americandream', '
')edit: and when we're done subsidising those Chinese suckers, maybe we can look at acquiring more land like they are.

[kublikhan]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('americandream', 'k')k seems to think we do 'cos the Chinese, Indians and everyone else is getting a slice of Africa.

[rangerone314]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'A')nything JD and his coterie of vegetarians says is nonsence.

The only way you an get fresh vegetables (I assume we have all heard of rickets, scurvy, atherosclerosis, diabetes, etc.) is to ship a lot of water. Veggies are 95% H20. Can't can bioflavanoids and anthrocyanadins.

[rangerone314]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('frankthetank', 'B')lukatzen-
I'd much rather buy something from a small farmer/locally grown then anything sold by big AG. Monoculture needs to disappear.

You know though, even the Romans imported food from distant lands. They grew crops in present day Tunisia to feed the masses back in Rome... So the idea has been around for some time.

[americandream]

The free marketeering, colonial primates exported the model of "free trade" to a world of 3 billion, localised and agrarian primates. What do you expect? Monkey see, monkey do. They see us in the West as the epitome of modernity and civilisation. If we were to start sending bathtubs into space to mine the moon, they'ld give that a go. Dismantling this free market from our end and starting to live within our means, is possibly the best favour we can do humankind, starting with localising our food production.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kublikhan', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('americandream', 'k')k seems to think we do 'cos the Chinese, Indians and everyone else is getting a slice of Africa.

[frankthetank]

My point is we need to turn to rail/ship for transportation of almost everything, be it food or people. Personal transportation is horribly, horribly inefficient and should be replaced by donkeys, mules, horses, bicycles or even electric bikes and maybe then look at gas powered scooters (they aren't that efficient in my book)... 100mpg may sound good, but compared to a train, its no comparison pound for pound.

The math on the Ford Focus isn't very impressive. Too move 1 ton cargo plus occupants (roughly speaking, probably not good to haul that much) would yield *maybe* mid teens mpgs...lets say 15 miles per ton per gallon!...

About tomatoes... i have a small yard (1/4 acres) and i KNOW i can grow every tomato i eat for a year right here... no doubts about it... and i eat a lot of sauce/soups...

[americandream]

All of this is wonderful, but for as long as we run this global trade free market scam, the problem will persist. Localisation is the sword with which we turn global trade to OUR service, not the other way around.

Localisation goes hand in hand with transport efficiencies. The latter in fact is a necessary facet of meaningful and sustainable localisation.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('frankthetank', 'M')y point is we need to turn to rail/ship for transportation of almost everything, be it food or people. Personal transportation is horribly, horribly inefficient and should be replaced by donkeys, mules, horses, bicycles or even electric bikes and maybe then look at gas powered scooters (they aren't that efficient in my book)... 100mpg may sound good, but compared to a train, its no comparison pound for pound.

The math on the Ford Focus isn't very impressive. Too move 1 ton cargo plus occupants (roughly speaking, probably not good to haul that much) would yield *maybe* mid teens mpgs...lets say 15 miles per ton per gallon!...

About tomatoes... i have a small yard (1/4 acres) and i KNOW i can grow every tomato i eat for a year right here... no doubts about it... and i eat a lot of sauce/soups...

[frankthetank]

You can bet your GMO corn it will continue!!!

Until then i say like my brother always tells me, "Burn 'em if you got 'em"... Me driving to my mailbox will not be denied...

Just to complete it, after some searching a semi gets:
162 miles per ton per gallon... not bad considering they can get anywhere and everywhere in this countries vast road system and is 8x better then a Ford F350 pickup truck per ton...