Food Miles

I read a blog entry from Victoria Von Biel, executive editor of Bon Appétit, about "food miles" today. In this entry, Victoria explains that the further a food item has to travel to it's destination, the larger its impact on energy and pollution. She also mentions that, along the way, items also stop at processing plants. This made me realize that food miles have a greater impact than Victoria thought. Stopping along the way, and traveling any distance at all increases the possibility of contaminating other foods and a wider area of people should the items be contaminated with salmonella or some other googly moogly that it picked up at its origin or along the way. This was one reason why the spinach and lettuce disasters of 2006 were so wide spread. So, not only is food travel killing the earth, it is also making sure it takes out a wider area of people all at once. I don't know if I'd rather die from the flooding of the melting glaciers or from a lower intestinal issue caused by a bad taco or anything alla Florentine. Contamination was not the purpose of the article, the purpose, however, was to announce that Tesco, a large grocery chain in the UK is planning to label its products with the amount of carbon dioxide generated from the production, transportation, and consumption of those items. I'm thinking that the folks in the marketing departments of these food companies are jumping out of windows right about now. How appetizing is a head of lettuce covered in road dirt, carbon dioxide, guilt, and the possibility of a foodborne illness?