2. 职称英语
  3. Homegrown Isn’t Always Best The term "food miles" ho

Homegrown Isn’t Always Best The term "food miles" ho

游客2024-12-16  10
问题                         Homegrown Isn’t Always Best
    The term "food miles" how far foot has traveled before you buy it—has entered the enlightened lexicon. Environmental groups, especially in Europe, are pushing for labels that show how far food has traveled to get to the market, and books like Barbara King-solver’s Animal, Vegetable, Miracle: A Year of Food Life contemplate the damage wrought by trucking, shipping and flying food from distant parts of the globe.
    There are many good reasons for eating local—freshness, purity, taste, community cohesion and preserving open space—but none of these benefits compares with the much-touted claim that eating local reduces fossil fuel consumption. On its face, the connection between lowering food miles and decreasing greenhouse gas emissions is a no-brainer. Seventy-five percent of the apples sold in New York City come from the West Coast or overseas, the writer Bill McKibben says, even though the state produces far more apples than city residents consume. In light of this market redundancy, the only reasonable reaction, it seems, is to count food miles the way a dieter counts calories.
    But is reducing food miles necessarily good for the environment?
    Researchers at Lincoln University in New Zealand recently published a study challenging the premise that more food miles automatically mean greater fossil fuel consumption. According to this peer reviewed research, compelling evidence suggests that there is more or less to food miles than meets the eye. It all depends on how you wield the carbon calculator. Instead of measuring a product’s carbon footprint through food miles alone, the Lincoln University scientists expanded their equations to include other en ergy-consuming aspects of production like water use, harvesting techniques, fertilizer outlays, disposal of packaging, storage procedures and dozens of other cultivation inputs.
    Incorporating these measurements into their assessments, scientists reached surprising conclusions. Most notably, they found that lamb raised on New Zealand’s clove-choked pastures and shipped 11,000 miles by boat to Britain produced 1,520 pounds of carbon dioxide emissions per ton while British lamb produced 6, 280 pounds of carbon dioxide per ton, in part because poorer British pastures force farmers to use feed. These life-cycle measurements are causing environmentalists worldwide to rethink the logic of food miles. New Zealand’s most prominent environmental research organization, Landcare Research-Manaaki Whenua, explains that localism " is not always the most environmentally sound solution if more emissions are generated at other stages of the product life cycle than during transport."
    " Eat local" advocates—a passionate group of which I am one—are bound to interpret these findings as a threat. We shouldn’t. Not only do life cycle analyses offer genuine opportunities for environmentally efficient food production, but they also address several problems inherent in the eat-local philosophy. [br] We can learn from the text that the author______.
选项 A、is still a firm advocate of eating local
B、becomes a supporter of food travelling
C、accepts that transport is not necessarily harmful to the environment
D、believes that life cycle analysis truly measures the environmental impact of eating
答案 D
解析 本题考查作者观点。第六段集中阐述了作者的观点。该段末句肯定了生命周期分析研究的作用：对食品生产的环保性提供了真实的信息，并指出了吃在本地哲学的问题，[D]是对该句的概括，为正确项。作者已经接受了“本土主义不一定最有利环境”的研究结论，[A]显然不正确。文中作者只是意识到“吃本地食物”的局限性，但未明确表现出对“食物运输”的支持，排除[B]。[C]将文中“运输不一定比本地种植对环境更有害”偷换成“运输可能对环境无害”，不正确。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3877405.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)