Green Madness

25 10 2009

treehugger

H/t beloved GiovanniWorld member LittleMissMuffin!

Those crazy lovable Scandinavians are at it again!

First, the Norwegian Scandinavians chose Obama for the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize, when he had been president for only two weeks.

Last week, the Norwegian government released the annual income and overall wealth of every taxpaying citizen.

Now, the Swede Scandinavians are putting carbon footprints on their food — all the better to make every Swede feel guilty every time they open their mouth to eat a morsel of food.

How long will it be before this, like a nuclear fallout, waft across the Atlantic onto our shores?

I’m all in favor of stamping carbon footprints on the foreheads of politicians, beginning with Al Gore. All in favor, say “Aye”!

~Eowyn

…………

SWEDISH FOODS NOW SHOW CARBON FOOTPRINTS

Elisabeth Rosenthal – New York Times – October 23, 2009

(10-23) 04:00 PDT Stockholm –

Shopping for oatmeal, Helena Bergstrom, 37, admitted that she was flummoxed by the label on the blue box reading, “Climate declared: .87 kg CO{-2} per kg of product.”

“Right now, I don’t know what this means,” said Bergstrom, a pharmaceutical company employee.

But if a new experiment here succeeds, she and millions of other Swedes will soon find out. New labels listing the carbon dioxide emissions associated with the production of foods, from whole wheat pasta to fast food burgers, are appearing on some grocery items and restaurant menus around the country.

People who live to eat might dismiss this as silly. But changing one’s diet can be as effective in reducing emissions of climate-changing gases as changing the car one drives or doing away with the clothes dryer, scientific experts say.

“We’re the first to do it, and it’s a new way of thinking for us,” said Ulf Bohman, head of the Nutrition Department at the Swedish National Food Administration, which was given the task last year of creating new food guidelines giving equal weight to climate and health. “We’re used to thinking about safety and nutrition as one thing and environmental as another.”

Some of the proposed new dietary guidelines, released over the summer, may seem startling to the uninitiated. They recommend that Swedes favor carrots over cucumbers and tomatoes, for example. (Unlike carrots, the latter two must be grown in heated greenhouses here, consuming energy.)

They are not counseled to eat more fish, despite the health benefits, because Europe’s stocks are depleted.

And somewhat less surprisingly, they are advised to substitute beans or chicken for red meat, in view of the heavy greenhouse gas emissions associated with raising cattle.

“For consumers, it’s hard,” Bohman acknowledged. “You are getting environmental advice that you have to coordinate with, ‘How can I eat healthier?’ ”

Many Swedish diners say it is just too much to ask. “I wish I could say that the information has made me change what I eat, but it hasn’t,” said Richard Lalander, 27, who was eating a Max hamburger (1.7 kilograms of carbon dioxide emissions) in the shadow of a menu board revealing that a chicken sandwich (0.4 kilograms) would have been better for the planet.

Yet if the new food guidelines were religiously heeded, some experts say, Sweden could cut its emissions from food production by 20 to 50 percent.

An estimated 25 percent of the emissions produced by people in industrialized nations can be traced to the food they eat, according to recent research here. And foods vary enormously in the emissions released in their production.

While today’s American or European shoppers may be well versed in checking for nutrients, calories or fat content, they often have little idea of whether eating tomatoes, chicken or rice is good or bad for the climate.

Complicating matters, the emissions impact of, say, a carrot, can vary by a factor of 10, depending how and where it is grown.

Earlier studies of food emissions focused on the high environmental costs of transporting food and raising cattle. But more nuanced research shows that the emissions depend on many factors, including the type of soil used to grow the food and whether a dairy farmer uses local rapeseed or imported soy for cattle feed.

“This is trial and error; we’re still trying to see what works,” Bohman said.

Advertisements

Actions

Information

10 responses

25 10 2009
DCG

This is completely insane…here in my County they mandated restaurants post the calories of meals. Hasn’t stopped the masses at McD’s and Wendy’s drive thrus during lunch time.

Like I said before, if the libs are so concerned about the environment they would all stop reproducing. Put up or shut up!

25 10 2009
Steve

I think the labeling sytem is cool. Now I will know which is the highest and always buy that……………….screw them and the polar bears who happen to be doing a pretty good job of screwing anyway.

25 10 2009
Steve

Eowyn……….I swear…I think I am overloaded. . My wife and I joke that My brain is full, so for each new bit of info that goes in, something has to fall out. I am walking around in a fog…….sorry I’ll snap out of it.

This barry thing is really starting to consume/worry me. How can he stand there and say the global warming “naysayers” are being marginalized. There are hundreds of thousands of scientists in agreement that man has no role in climate change. Did you know the UN panel that they use so much in talking up their consensus? Well let me tell you what I found one day. They like to say that 2500 scientists agreed on AGW. 1st they were not all scientists, in fact most were pencil pushers….. but wait it gets better. They were not asked to do a study……….nooooooooo. They were asked just to review material from a prior study. Do you know how many actually completed the review?……… c’mon take a guess…………62. That’s right 62 damn people actually made time from their busy schedule to complete the review…..that’s sad.

Huh……What’s that you say….It couldn’t get any worse……….well I’m glad you asked that question. Now out of the 62 who completed the study……How many ya think agreed with the AGW conclusion……….wait for it. Lets put it another way – How many disagreed with the study…55 scientists had serious problems ith the study and outcome, sooooooooooo in actuality you have a GRAND TOTAL and CONCENSUS of…Drum Roll Please 7….a Consensus of 7 is what’s driving this bus with Al Snore.

So in short these people are to blame for me going batsnot crazy…LOL……………7 people…………are you freaking kidding me. And I want to know just who the 43% of the population is that still believe in this. They are maroooons…Rant over.

PS: did you know this little tidbit?

Short Blurb from link below: “For example, the UN claimed 2,500 scientists supported its key claim that human-generated greenhouse gases are the primary cause of global warming. But those 2,500 weren’t asked to support it–they were only asked to review it. Only 62 completed the review, and 55 had serious concerns, leaving a total of seven to support the science that is the basis of the IPCC climate-change policy.”

The so-called consensus on global warming is melting
http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/story.html?id=46999d7c-4078-4fe4-a0e0-3df0eaac0f4f

25 10 2009
giovanniworld

AYE!

One minor change if possible…. Since Al Gore is the Snake selling this BS, his should be a permanent Tattoo. Is this ok with you?

Gio-

P.S. I will even volunteer to do the Tattoo. (no, I have never done a tattoo. but you gotta admit, it will be fun practicing on old fat Al.

25 10 2009
Bob

AYE!!!

25 10 2009
jocaasbe

Wow, I like it here!
Dave

26 10 2009
giovanniworld

Dave,

I saw your post last night just as I was about to jump off and go to bed. When I saw what you had written, I wanted to thank you and welcome you to our little slice of heaven. But my computer had other ideas and it decided that it was a great time to freeze-up on me. It took me another ten minutes to get my PC functioning so I decided to leave it alone and go to bed.

Now that it’s a new day and my PC is behaving, let me once again welcome you aboard. Some of us may be Republicans, some of us may be Democrats, and some like myself, are fiercly independent. We are very much a Conservative group and I don’t mean squishy Conservatives like Newt has become, but honest to goodness Reagan Conservatives. So now that you know where most of us are coming from, you are free to run like hell. πŸ˜‰

Gio-

26 10 2009
Steve

Dave……were glad you’ve joined our merry band of misfits LOL, …;) and it seems you bring with you a partner. Or is that just to make you look good in the pic….LOL
Steve’

26 10 2009
littlemissmuffin

Those Environmental Californians are at it again:

http://biggovernment.com/2009/10/26/cool-cars-guaranteed-to-make-you-hot-under-the-collar/

Eowyn: You need to move to another state before they come after you! πŸ™‚

26 10 2009
Steve

muffin………………..your right….they have gone over the edge so may I suggest they go over the edge.
OK, Here’s what we need to do and do it fast. We need a bunch of jackhammers, Oh Eowyn, start packing….LOL we’ll all pick a spot on the state line from top to bottom and we’ll meet in Promatory and Drive the Golden Spike and watch as Cali goes sliding off into the Pacific. We need to get rid of those nut jobs……………not Eowyn of course. Let me know when your packed and I’ll be there myself to get ya…… πŸ˜‰
Steve

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




%d bloggers like this: