Buying imported food may actually be more energy-efficient

For the conscientious, food shopping now poses yet another ethical dilemma: is it really better to buy locally rather than shipping meat, fruit and vegetables around the globe?

A conference of experts yesterday heard that importing food from the other side of the world can actually be more energy-efficient than buying British produce and helps developing countries tackle poverty.
Dr Alexander Kasterine, of the International Trade Centre, a United Nations agency, told delegates that many UK farms used more energy than those in Kenya as they relied on tractors and other machinery rather than manual labour. About 85 per cent of energy used in product distribution happens once goods are in the UK, he said.

He said UK farmers received subsidies from the European Union. “You can’t take that money and then punish African farmers who don’t have any subsidies,” he said.

“Farmers get a diesel subsidy. They get a direct-energy subsidy of 50p per litre. And yet the same farmers are telling Africans not to air-freight their products.; it is totally absurd.”

Dr Kasterine said UK consumers produced around 30 times more emissions than those in East Africa.

“My point is that we should think about changing our rich lifestyles and how really we should be thinking about decreasing carbon dioxide before cutting the route for the very poorest to get out of poverty,” he said.

Scotsman