Green Options

A new documentary film, “Food Inc.” exposes a frightening portrait of how dysfunctional and destructive our food system has become, and how dishonest corporations repeatedly compromise safety for profit. The movie illustrates how our nation is almost totally divorced from seasonal food, biodiversity and local production. We have entrusted the safety of our food system to a small handful of huge greedy corporations that are destroying us and the planet with massive monoculture factory farms and poisonous chemicals.

In a meeting to discuss food security, the head of the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization Jacques Diouf announced another 40 million people globally were pushed into hunger in 2008. As population estimates project there will be nine billion people on the planet in 2050, Diouf says food production must double in order to address current deficits and to prevent another billion people from starving.

It’s been a bad couple of weeks for processed foods.  On the heels of the peanut butter recall came the newsmercury-tainted high fructose corn syrup (HFCS).  And this, of course, has reopened the debate over HFCS.

Is it the cause of obesity in America?  Is it really the same as table sugar?  Is it an evil, liquidy villain complete with horns and a tail?  Regardless of how you answer those three questions, from a sustainability perspective alone, we should stop consuming so much HFCS.  Here’s why, and how you can cut down.

Obama needs to address the industrial, transcontinental food system, as it is connected to the economic, climate, and energy crises facing the world. What better way for the president to participate in the local food revolution then turning five acres of the White House Lawn into an organic farm?

Looking for more proof that Barack Obama understands the real challenges we’re facing when it comes to energy, food, the environment and sustainability? Then check out these comments from his interview last week with Time’s Joe Klein:

“I was just reading an article in the New York Times by Michael Pollen (sic) about food and the fact that our entire agricultural system is built on cheap oil. As a consequence, our agriculture sector actually is contributing more greenhouse gases than our transportation sector. And in the mean time, it’s creating monocultures that are vulnerable to national security threats, are now vulnerable to sky-high food prices or crashes in food prices, huge swings in commodity prices, and are partly responsible for the explosion in our healthcare costs because they’re contributing to type 2 diabetes, stroke and heart disease, obesity, all the things that are driving our huge explosion in healthcare costs.”

Guest contributor Pamela Price is the founder of Red, White & Grew, a blog devoted to “Promoting the Victory Garden Revival and other simple, earth-friendly endeavors as bipartisan, patriotic acts in an age of uncertainty.”

Not too long ago, Eat the View (ETV) founder Roger Doiron wondered here how to push the idea of creating a new White House Victory Garden further into the public sphere. At the time, he hoped to see Obama and McCain say on camera whether or not they’d follow in the footsteps of Eleanor Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson and allocate a portion of the First Lawn to food production. Thus far neither presidential contender has addressed the notion, but much of the rest of the country is going to learn about it very soon… thanks to the Vimeo.com Climate Matters Video Contest.

Dear Farmer-in-Chief
Michael Pollan writes a letter to the future president to explain why the health care crisis, energy independence, and climate change cannot be solved without addressing our  Some compelling facts from the essay include; “After cars, the food system uses more fossil fuel than any other sector of the economy — 19 percent … the way we feed ourselves contributes more greenhouse gases to the atmosphere than anything else we do — as much as 37 percent … [it] now takes 10 calories of fossil-fuel energy to produce a single calorie of modern supermarket food.” Worth a read, or a debate question or two.

On the Road Again
Having just navigated the local food on the road path myself, I enjoyed this article at Ethicurean on how to find local food while traveling. Sure, the airport is a lost cause for local cuisine, but eating local on the road can add a lot to your travel experience.

October’s Eat Local Challenge
The last month of the harvest season for most of us, October marks a significant month for Eat Local Challenge participants. Learn more about the event at the Eat Local Challenge site.

The Latest on the Farm Bill
Michael Pollan sent an email to his subscriber list with his take on the Farm Bill that was finally passed after much delay, debate, a veto, a Congressional override. The short take is the bill contains no major subsidy reform. Pollan’s words on the subject:

Here’s what I think happened. Critics of farm-policy-as usual– and I count myself among them– did a much better job of demonizing subsidies than they did proposing alternative forms of farm support that would have won over some percentage of the farmers now receiving subsidies. The whole discourse depicting subsidies as a form of welfare — payments to celebrities, rich people in cities, mega-farms etc– convinced many farmers that the ultimate goal of the farm bill’s critics was to abolish subsidies, rather than to develop a new set of incentives that would encourage farmers to grow real food and take good care of their land. Had the reformers crafted proposals that were easy to explain and attractive to even just a segment of commodity-crop farmers, we could have made much more progress. Instead, faced with what appeared like a threat to their livelihood, the old guard hunkered down and defended the status quo, refusing even to negotiate on the central issues. Better alternatives could have split this block, and it was our failing not to devise and promote them. What the Old Guard did instead of negotiating a new system of farm support was what it has always done: pick off the opposition, faction by faction, by offering money for pet programs. The history of the farm bill has long been about such trade offs: Urban legislators support subsidies in exchange for rural support for food stamps. That Grand Bargain has now been extended to supporters of organic agriculture, local food systems, school lunch advocates, etc. The reason that, in the end, most of the activist groups wound up urging Congress to override the veto is that, by the end, they all had been given something they liked in the bill. You could put it more baldly, and suggest they’d all been bought off– that the $300-plus billion bill represents the exact price of buying off all the critics of the farm bill, plus the cost of maintaining the status quo. But this is how the game is played, and the fact is, some good will come of these programs, modest as they are– they will sow seeds of change and legitimize alternative food chains, or so we can hope.

You swap out your light bulbs for energy-efficient ones, keep your house as chilled as a meat locker in winter, bicycle to work, eat little meat and drive a hybrid — yet nagging at you is this thought: Do my small actions make a difference? Author Michael Pollan says they do.

In last week’s Sunday New York Times Magazine (4.20.08), Pollan wrote a provocative essay, “Why Bother? Looking for a few good reasons to go green.” In it, he wrestles with those lurking questions about our everyday choices to stave off global warming. Some excerpts:

Let’s say I do bother, big time. I turn my life upside-down…, but what would be the point when I know full well that halfway around the world there lives my evil twin, some carbon-footprint doppelgänger in Shanghai or Chongqing who has just bought his first car (Chinese car ownership is where ours was back in 1918), is eager to swallow every bite of meat I forswear and who’s positively itching to replace every last pound of CO2 I’m struggling no longer to emit. So what exactly would I have to show for all my trouble?

He looks at the reasons we find for not doing anything: “There are so many stories we can tell ourselves to justify doing nothing,” he writes.

And yet, he resoundingly concludes that those little things are worth the bother.

So, when Michael Pollan set forth his short mantra on food, what did it all actually mean when you go to fill your dinner plate? For starters, we eat too much in general, and too much of the wrong things. Following are some very specific guidelines on actual portion sizes, and tips on eating right without dieting. I hate dieting.

First, some general “gut checks” you should keep in mind daily:

• How many servings of each type of food we should eat each day
• All the different colors and kinds of veggies, and if you are eating a variety
• Small meals and healthy snacks work best for moderating blood glucose levels
• When is best to eat, and what combinations of foods are best for you (eating proteins with carbs to balance sugars for diabetics, for example)
• The true size of a portion, and sticking to it
• The tremendous amount of healthy food you can eat for the same amount of calories as a small bit of unhealthy food

As a writer of fiction, I constantly get the question, “Where do you get your ideas?” The answer is, two places: I get out and play in the world a lot and I read a LOT! I wanted to share some of the books on my shelf, so that you too…can get inspired.

Food and food production was the first topic I tackled. I haven’t read it yet, but Michael Pollan’s new book, In Defense of Food: An Eater’s Manifesto, sounds excellent. I enjoyed listening to a recent interview with him on Talk of the Nation and have it on hold at my local library. Michael Pollan also did a fantastic job with An Omnivore’s Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals. Many people are familiar with Pollan’s writing, but I wanted to make you aware of some titles you may have missed.

I believe I stumbled up Fat Land by Greg Critser first. Being a health and wellness consultant, the subtitle, “How Americans Became the Fattest People in the World,” is what caught my eye.