3 Easy Ways to Eat Up Less Carbon

The term "carbon footprint" has become a way to define the impact our lifestyle has on the environment. More specifically, the "proper" definition has two components: "primary" and "secondary" footprint. The primary footprint measures our lifestyle in terms of our choices for transportation (car, airplane) and energy consumption (at home, work). The secondary measures the carbon emissions used for the products we consume. When it comes to food choices, the specifics of our secondary carbon footprint take center stage. If we define the secondary footprint in these simple terms, there are many ways to reduce your personal impact on the environment. Here are three ways to make significant, positive changes.

1.  Filter your tap water instead of drinking bottled water. By purchasing bottled water, we encourage the carbon-emitting manufacture of the plastic that is used to make water bottles, causing a "primary" negative impact on the environment. In purchasing the water at your local convenience store, the "secondary" footprint is enlarged by the transportation that is required to deliver the water from the plant to the retailer.

2.  Avoid buying foods that traveled vast distances to reach your table: A good example is the produce that is consumed in winter months in the cold regions of our country. This produce is almost always flown to the retailers in large jet aircraft that consumes vast amounts of petroleum-based fuel that, in turn, releases vast amounts of carbon into the atmosphere.

3.  Avoid foods that are engulfed by excessive packaging: Like bottled water, foods that are engulfed in plastics and papers encourage the manufacturing processes that release carbon into the environment. The problem is ballooned by the carbon that is emitted from these packaging materials as they decompose in landfills and waste dumps.

These three practices are a good place to start, but the issue is complex: Are the ingredients farthest from us the ones that negatively impact our footprint the most? Though generally true, that criterion does not always tell the whole story. The emissions of airplanes and trucks are far greater than ships or trains. That makes the method of transportation an important factor to be considered in conjunction with the number of miles the product has traveled.

What about the manner used to create the food before it leaves the producer? The answer to this question also plays an integral role of our assessment of the carbon footprint. A food grown on another continent certainly logs more miles getting to your table but that only paints a partial picture. What if that product was grown responsibly, (i.e., a produce grown with compost-based soils without use of pesticides) and transported via a more "carbon friendly" method of transportation (train as opposed to plane)? It could mean a more environmentally-responsible choice than something mass-produced within the country and then shipped by jet airliner.