Food miles ‘myth’

Article talks about the ‘myth’ of food miles as some people argue that imported food is greener than food produced in the UK. Introduces readers to a family living in Fife, Scotland who only each food grown in the area. Father Mike believes people should eat locally produced food to save the environment (locavores). The idea that only ‘local is good” has come under attack. Some people argue that because food grown in the UK uses fertilsers and machines such as tractors in their production, they are in no way ‘carbon friendly’. Experts also argue that the idea of ‘food miles’ is useless, as it doesn’t ‘inform about anything except distance travelled’. Imported foods such as beans from Kenya are said to be more carbon friendly as they use cow muck as fertilizers and low-tech irrigation systems. It also provides employment to people in the developing world. Another argument is that storing home grown foods is more harmful to the environment than importing food from other countries. Experts argue that food miles are a bad way to judge food sustainability and to instead look at storage and preparation also. Instead of a calculation of food miles use a carbon footprint measure. http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/mar/23/food.ethicalliving?INTCMP=SRCH Local food is MILES better? (1) Food miles harm the environment
Transporting food large distances uses a lot of fuel, whether it travels by lorry or plane. That means more carbon dioxide emissions and more global warming. 
Did you know? Since 1978 the amount of food moved about within the UK by HGV has increased by 23% and the average distance for each trip has jumped by 50%. (2) Food miles reduce freshness
The further food has to travel, the longer it spends in transit. That means vitamins are lost and nutritional values inevitably decline. 
Did you know? Imports of indigenous foods