Gareth Kane on: Football and Food
Having munched his way through more food than he would like to admit in front of the TV on Cup Final Day, Gareth Kane considers the environmental implications of what we eat.
"Great stadium, tedious game" was the general verdict on Saturday's FA Cup drudge match at the new Wembley. My personal prediction - that the only goal would be scored by Gullit, Jose Mourinho's fugitive Yorkshire Terrier, diving out from his hiding place under Jose's coat, tearing across the field and diverting an innocuous Chelsea backpass into their own net - was as wide of the mark as Ronaldo's shooting.
From an eco point of view, the dullness of the (in)action was eclipsed by the huge amount of grub the fans worked their way through. As reported in the Guardian (and quoted below), in the 2004 final, Manchester United and Millwall fans at the match put away 37,624 sausage rolls, pies or pasties, 26,965 sandwiches, 17,998 hot dogs, 12,780 burgers, 11,502 packets of crisps and 23,909 portions of chips. This made up a large proportion of the ecological footprint of the match as a whole.
In "How to Live a Low-Carbon Life", Chris Goodall, calculates that food is responsible for about 2 of our personal 12 tonnes of carbon dioxide per year when you take into account fertilizers, transport, processing, packaging, preparation and rotting. He goes on to suggest you can cut this by two thirds by buying local and organic, eating less meat and dairy products, avoiding supermarkets and composting your waste.
The biggest dilemma is when you have to choose between local or organic - and I must admit my rules are a bit arbitrary. If I'm in an organic store I buy anything I fancy as they tend to be better at local sourcing and don't transport stuff around the country like big stores. If I'm in a normal shop or (cough) supermarket I go local, mainly because climate change is the big destroyer of the moment.
One little factoid that gets bandied about is that every calorie of food on average requires ten calories of oil to get from 'farm to fork'. If this is correct then cycling is technically less eco-friendly than driving due to the extra food you have to eat to power the bike and the oil used to produce it. Of course we should be reducing the carbon footprint of food rather than switching from cycling to driving, but if you are feeling guilty sitting in front of the FA Cup next year, then you can reassure yourself that your inactivity is good for the planet. As long as you don't eat anything.
Until next time,
Gareth
Gareth Kane
Eco-living Blog
Terra Infirma
