文章大意:本文是一篇说明文。文章就“减少食物里程来减少碳排放”这一观点进行讨论。作者认为:要想减少碳排放,不仅仅要减少食物里程,更要着眼于整个农业过程以及其他的多方面因素。
Recently, environmentalists have encouraged us to buy local food. This reduces “food miles”, that is, the distance food travels to get from the producer to the seller. They reason that the higher the food miles, the more carbon emissions (碳排放). Buying local. food, therefore, has a lower carbon footprint and is more environmentally friendly.
However, the real story is not as simple as that. If our aim is to reduce carbon emissions, we must look at the whole farming process, not just transportation. According to a 2008 study, only 11% of carbon emissions in the food production process result from transportation, and only 4% came from the final delivery (运输) of the product from the producer to the seller.
In fact, imported food from other countries often has a lower carbon footprint than locally grown food. Take apples, for example. In autumn, when apples are harvested, the best thing for British people to do is to buy British apples. However, the apples we buy in winter or spring have been kept refrigerated for months, and this uses up a lot of energy. In spring, therefore, it is more energy-saving to import them from New Zealand, where they are in season. Heating also uses a lot of energy, which is why growing tomatoes in heated greenhouses in the UK is less environmentally friendly than importing them from Spain, where the tomatoes grow well in the local climate.
We must also take into consideration the type of transport. Transporting food by air creates about 50 times more emissions than shipping it. However, only a small number of goods are flown to foreign countries, and these are usually high value, perishable (易腐烂的) goods which we cannot produce locally, such as seafood and out-of-season berries. Even then, these foods may not have a higher carbon footprint than locally grown food. For example, beans flown in from Kenya are grown in sunny fields using human labour and natural fertilisers (肥料), unlike in Britain, where we use oil-based fertilisers and machinery. Therefore, the total carbon footprint is still lower.
It’s also worth remembering that a product’s journey does not end at the supermarket. The distance customers travel to buy their food, and the kind of transport they use will also add to its carbon footprint. So driving a long way to shop for food will wipe out any environmental benefits of buying locally grown produce.
Recently, some supermarkets have been trying to raise awareness of food miles by labelling (标记) foods with stickers that show it has been imported by air. But the message this gives is too simple. Lots of different factors contribute to a food’s carbon footprint besides the distance it has travelled.
32. What can we learn about “food miles”?
A.It influences how people deliver and transport food. |
B.It will increase if people are encouraged to buy local food. |
C.It is the key factor contributing to a food’s carbon emissions. |
D.It shows how far the food goes from farmland to supermarkets. |
33. The author will probably agree that ________.
A.transporting food by air is the most energy-saving type of shipping |
B.storing local food creates more carbon emissions than importing food |
C.human labour and natural fertilisers can increase the carbon footprint |
D.growing out-of-season food takes less energy than importing food in season |
34. What is the author’s attitude towards cutting food miles to reduce carbon emissions?
A.Supportive. | B.Confused. | C.Negative. | D.Doubtful. |