Locavore Dbq

The circumstances surrounding the locavore movement have been continuously debated over the past decade. Pro-locavores insist that locally grown produce just naturally tastes better. They claim that purchasing local products ultimately protects the consumer from bio-terrorism. However, the benefits of becoming a locavore are still undefined from a statistical standpoint. Because it has been proven that food miles are insignificant during the food handling process, and the definition of “local” is still unclear amongst supporters of the movement, it’s easy to see through a larger scope how becoming a locavore is highly impractical.
Naturally, locavores advocate that organic, locally grown produce “just plain tastes better” (Source A). Jennifer
An analysis by Rich Pirog, who works for the Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture, reveals that “transportation accounts for only 11% of food’s carbon footprint” (Source C). The way locavores manipulate the calculation of food miles to fit their argument is highly inaccurate. For example, “a shipper sending a truck with 2,000 apples over 2,000 miles would consume the same amount of fuel per apple as a local farmer who takes a pickup 50 miles to sell 50 apples” (Source C). Eating locally is not a solution to lessening food’s carbon footprint, “[t]he critical measure [in this scenario] is not food miles, but rather apples per gallon” (Source C). He further claims that “[a] fourth of the energy required to produce food is expended in the consumer’s kitchen” (Source C). This statement is further illustrated in the chart in Source D. This visual representation validates how production is more of an impact when considering the “total greenhouse gas emissions” to “household food consumption” (Source D). By taking the oath to become a locavore, people are also taking a pledge to unknowingly increase the CO2 emissions in the atmosphere by eating