Hello Kyle. I am very glad that you took the time to read my
article. However, you seem to have missed a key point. At the beginning of my
piece I said, “And even in the face of this derision I decide I am going to
bother, there arises the whole vexed question of getting it right. Is eating
local or walking to work really going to reduce my carbon footprint?” I then
concluded, “If determining the carbon footprint of food is really this
complicated… I’ll just buy the imported chops at Costco, at least until the
experts get their footprints sorted out.” With these lines I was stating that
calculating our carbon footprint is complicated and can be very inaccurate.
These complications may dissuade or prevent people from taking the time and
effort to reduce their carbon footprint. As a solution I recommend people
garden in order to benefit the environment and themselves.
In your
response you said, “I would have liked him to discuss how we as consumers could
buy more fuel-efficient cars, avoid plastic packaging, drink tap water, and buy
products from green industries.” If I were to do this Kyle I would go against
my entire argument. You wish me to be the scientist calculating the carbon
footprints that I referred to in my piece. I am the confused consumer like you,
not the scientist. My mission was to simplify the process for my readers and
therefore I recommend that they garden. Also, you referred to gardening as, “hours
of backbreaking labor.” I find this very interesting. Gardening is something my
75-year-old grandmother does for fun. I suggest that you put down your iPad and
garden. From the sound of it not only will you be helping the environment but
you will also be fighting the growing epidemic of childhood obesity.
Live Long and Prosper,
Michael “Faux” Pollan
No comments:
Post a Comment