we are what we....

My food choices are probably among the most unsustainable choices I make, at least from an environmental standpoint. I am a big time carnivore, even though I am fully aware of the amount of energy required to create a food-Calorie of meat. This is a lifestyle choice, but also a nutritional one: I am altogether too aware of how much careful planning it takes to replace all the nutritional value in meat, and have seen first hand too many vegetarians/vegans fail to pay close enough attention to their vitamin and complete/incomplete protein intake, to the detriment of their health.

To be honest, the only real driver of my food choices is nutritional value per dollar. I lead an active lifestyle that demands proper nutrition, but have a really limited budget. Since food is just about the biggest budget item after rent for me, I have to cut corners where I can. Given a choice between eating green and eating healthy, i choose healthy, given my economic constraints.

Also, I am unconvinced by the "organic" movement sweeping our fair nation. This term is almost devoid of standard, and seems like classic greenwashing in a lot of situations. I chuckle when I see environmentally conscious people paying extra for "organic" produce that is watered with toxic Chinese groundwater and shipped with fossil fuels around the globe.

I hope to embrace local when I have the funds, if not for green purposes for quality purposes. As the Brits say, you have to "eat your view": if you want farms and rural areas in your neighborhood, support those farms at the grocery store!

No, I don't really think about the environmental impact when I buy food.  I usually just think of how long it will last and if it will be good to eat.

The thing with the highest environmental impact I buy is probably coffee, but I don't actually pay for it.  I get a pound for free per week because of where I work.  Other than that, probably Snickers bars when I buy them (every other day)

What exactly am I eating?

I must say that I really like this class because it makes me re-evaluate my lifestyle. I try and make changes in my routine in hopes that I will help the environment, but one thing that I hardly ever do is think about the food I buy. I'm fully aware of the pesticides and fossil fuels which are used to produce and transport a lot of our food not to mention the damage the involved ecosystems face including issues of species endangerment. Still, this very rarely crosses my mind when I go food shopping which is troubling to think about. The main thing which I consider when buying food is the cost, whatever is the cheapest is what I bring home. I've thought about this issue before, but it always gets brushed to the side of my to-do list because in my eyes it's inconvenient. While attending AU my parents pay for my food but that means a limited budget that I have to spend wisely. Because of this it's hard to buy organic food because nine times out of ten that means more money. I have to say that I'm not extremely educated on this subject, so therefore I don't know all of my options, but I'm willing to bet there's a middle ground that I could be supporting instead of doing nothing.
In addition to buying my food, I also have a meal plan. I don't have as many options in the dining hall as I would if I were to eat all of my own food, but I can still pick and choose. From what I've seen, the dining hall has been pretty good about switching to locally grown produce and they support sustainable fishing. Even so, I find myself not choosing food based on what's best for the environment, but just by whatever looks good.
If I had to pick something that I've eaten in the past few days which has had the greatest environmental impact I would say it's been tuna. The reason I pick tuna is because of the huge trawlers which are used to catch the fish. Not only do they use large quantities of fossil fuels, but they disturb the ocean's ecosystems. Huge nets are pulled along the ocean floor killing and capturing everything in their path. Once the nets are brought to the surface, whatever isn't needed is thrown out as bycatch.
After discussing this issue for our blog I no longer feel I can go to the supermarket without reading the labels and finding out more information on where my food is coming from. Food is a serious issue not only concerning the environment, but with respect to our own health. I'm sure many people would rather eat organic if they knew just how many pesticides and GMOs were introduced to their food!

Food

When making food choices, I buy organic, pasture raised and fed, and chemical free. Partly, I do this because I care about the environment and I can afford it. I don't pay my food bills, my parents do and they don't mind me spending twice as much for organic food. However, the main reason I buy organic food is because I can't eat a lot of conventionally grown food. I develop allergies if I eat conventionally grown food, but I have few problems if I eat organic food. Over the years, I have developed a wheat allergy, a peanut allergy, and a number of fruit allergies, but once I switched to organic, these allergies went away . I can't be the only person in this country who has issues eating foods covered in pesticides and chemicals, that has been irradiated, and shipped from thousands of miles away. 

Ideally, I would also like to eat locally, but that is really hard to do in DC. When I go to Wholefoods, almost everything is from California, with the rest of the produce coming from Florida, Washington state, and other countries. There are farms in Maryland and Virginia, some of which grow organic food, but none of it is sold where I shop. It is frustrating, especially since I used to eat organically and locally, but it is easy to do in Florida. My parent's live across the street from a farm and every town has at least one farmer's market or farmer's co-op. I could get organic, locally raised chickens, shrimp, fish, lambs, and goats that were fed what they were supposed to eat instead of the industrialized wheat and antibiotic diet that is becoming the norm. 

I think its the fact that I can't eat locally in DC easily that has the worst impact on the environment, instead of a particular food I have eaten recently. I know that there are places to get organic, locally grown food in DC, but they aren't very easy to get to considering I don't have a car so I don't go to these places to buy organic, locally grown food. I realize its just laziness on my part as I could take a cab to get the food back to my apartment. I know locally grown food is better for the environment, but the environmental impact of driving the 15-20 miles to buy it has more of an apparent environmental impact, from my perspective, then buying organically grown food from 5 states away, as I would actively be taking part in the driving. I can easily ignore the impact of transporting the food as I had no part in it, especially since it means that I can shop at a local grocery store, instead of going out of my way to be environmentally friendly. 

Technology?

I am indifferent on whether or not technology will save us.  Some new technology is greener, but other technology is getting worse.  Maybe once everything is green, technology can save us; until then, technology can only do so much before canceling itself out as good.  Newer technology means using new resources, probably recycled when technology saves us.  This is good for the environment, , using old waste.  

Technology: Friend or Foe?

Technology is certainly a contributor to our world's current state of environmental destruction, but it's not the only one. It's linked to society's demand for bigger and better things. We do have to be realistic in the sense that we won't go back to using the horse-and-buggy as Rob stated in his blog, but we also have to acknowledge that the reasoning for this is because technology has managed to set our standard of living. When we have discovered a quicker and more efficient mode of transportation, what's the incentive to move backwards?
This is my main concern. Granted, some technologies are extremely useful in the sense that they save lives and even help the environment in some respect, but is a new model of ipod, cell phone, or computer really necessary every few years? If we want to address one of the bigger issues here, I think that it's our need to consume combined with technology. It's always a rat race between industries to see who can sell more which is a problem because our limited resources are being depleted at rapid rates.
On the other hand we have made great efforts in discovering technologies which work to minimize our environmental impact. Although, once again technology is not the only thing we must consider when evaluating this issue. Technology can only do so much before societal cooperation is called into play. If we have cleaner, more efficient cars but no one is buying them, what good will they do? In this respect people must be interested in fixing the problem before technology can start to minimize our footprint. That being said, I think technology can help us fix some of our problems in the future, but more importantly there has to be the desire for change.

Technology

I have to agree with Rob about being reluctant to condemn technology, but for different reasons. I feel that considering the current state of the environment, turning away from technology would do more harm than good. The pollution resulting from human activity will not magically disappear if we just suddenly stopped using technology. However, there are known techniques for getting rid of and reducing the pollution in the air and water that has resulted from human action, with better techniques being developed all the time. Not using these techniques would probably do more harm for the planet as the pollution would just sit there and slowly breakdown, possibly creating even more harmful by-products in the mean time, as opposed to the impact created by getting rid of pollution using technology. Technology has the possibility of reducing people's impact on the planet and even reversing it. 

I do understand where people who condemn technology are coming from. There is a real possibility that people could become secondary to technology or that technology will help people trash the planet even quicker than we are doing so right now. I worry about it too, especially with the number of movies and TV shows about a post-apocalyptic future where humanity, and the planet, are dying because of something really stupid people did, like building a computer capable of artificial intelligence that decides to destroy humanity [Terminator] or where men become sterile [Children of Men]. 

You don't even have to look to fiction to see the damage people can do with technology. The hole in the ozone layer, the destruction of habitats, acid rain, and countless other problems with the environment that technology and people have caused. However, here I would have to agree with Rob when he says that technology may not be a force unto itself. Every instance where technology helps destroy the planet, it does not act by itself [yet anyway], but is directed and used by people, usually to help people have more stuff or to cope with growing populations. Technology doesn't seem to be the problem even if it does help people destroy the planet faster as people seem to be the real problem. People need to want to consume less so that we destroy the planet less and hopefully reverse our effects. Don't blame technology for the impact people have, blame people.