Vert-à-Go

I initially described this acorn squash as a leftover, but really it wasn’t, because it had never actually gotten as far as being cooked. It had simply sat in a bowl in the counter for three weeks, staring at me accusingly while I tried to avoid looking at it. That’s what you get for buying something you don’t often buy without having a specific plan for how you’re going to use it!

The other issue with the squash is that I had only bought one of them, which really wasn’t going to go far enough to feed four people in any recipe I already knew, so there it sat. I finally realised that it wasn’t actually going to leap onto the stove itself (although I suppose it might have, if I’d left it another couple weeks). So I turned, as always, to Chef Google. This simple recipe for apple acorn squash soup from BC Tree Fruits* took care of that squash, a few apples that weren’t quite as crisp as they once had been, and part of a huge bunch of parsley that seems to have no end. It also finished off the chicken stock I had in the freezer, which prompted me to make another batch of stock that in turn used up some not-so-crisp celery and more of that never-ending parsley. The crisper drawer is now in much better shape. Only nice fresh vegetables remain and I don’t have to feel a twinge of guilt or apprehension when I open the drawer. A fridge really isn’t any different than the rest of the house–if any part of it gets ridiculously cluttered, then it can become very difficult to concentrate at the task at hand (in this case, cooking).

Food waste really has become a huge issue for me over the past few years, and I’ll soon be starting a series on how to drastically cut down on the amount of food that gets thrown in the (compost, hopefully) bin. In the past it was quite common for me to have to chuck stuff out, but now it’s a pretty rare exception. It’s not that hard to change your habits–some menu planning, inventory-keeping, thoughtful grocery shopping, and liberal use of your good friend Google will all help to get your groceries into your stomach where they belong, rather than the landfill. An estimated 5% of food is thrown out of Canadian fridges–at least–on a regular basis. In Britain, it’s about 1/3rd and in the US, estimates are as high as 40%. I can’t see why Canada’s level of waste would be much different. Cutting back on this unnecessary waste is the easiest way to reduce our consumption and ease the demand for food production, not to mention reduce the significant methane gas emissions caused by decomposing organic matter in landfills while saving you some significant money on your food bills too.

As Alex Renton wrote in the Observer a few weeks ago, there would be no need for GM crops if supermarkets and consumers weren’t so wasteful. The first and easiest place to start is with a warming winter bowl of soup like the one above!

* Those are walnuts floating on the top. They weren’t about to go bad–I just thought they would taste good, and so they did. Next time I will candy them. Yum. It could easily be made into a vegetarian soup by substituting vegetable stock.

Today was Stop Climate Chaos Day–a day of action coinciding with the UN climate talks in Poznan, Poland. Events took place across the country and across the world, spearheaded by an umbrella group of organisations ranging from the Sierra Club, Oxfam, the World Wildlife Fund, Greenpeace, and Unicef. But it wasn’t all about marches and speeches. Organisers also urged supporters to hold potlucks and write letters to the editor to show solidarity and get the word out about the need for action to decrease the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to 350 parts per million. Because the personal is also political, I cooked one of our favourite vegetarian dinners in honour of the day. In September, the UN declared that people living in the west could make a big contribution toward fighting climate change by eating less meat. It has been estimated that halving the average person’s meat consumption would make a bigger difference to CO2 emissions than cutting their car use in half.

I sometimes have difficulty balancing a vegetarian meal so that I don’t feel like I need to eat a bowl of pasta as big as my head to feel full. In my opinion, the true star of the vegetarian world is the humble lentil. Lentils are not only high in protein and fibre–they are also an excellent source of iron (80% of your daily dose in just one cup), magnesium, tryptophan, and folate. When you serve them wiith rice, they become a complete source of protein. They are therefore an excellent meat-free main dish that will leave everyone satisfied.

Monastery lentils have become my go-to dish on busy weeknights and I probably make it once a week. As you might infer from the recipe’s name, it has the added bonus of being incredibly easy to prepare as well as being extremely economical, hearty, and yummy (I think you could easily feed 4 people for about a dollar apiece). You can also easily substitute dried local lentils, homemade stock, or frozen tomatoes for the canned variety, thereby reducing both the sodium content (and its food miles/climate impact) even further.

Monastery Lentils (with thanks to Sam)

• 1 - 14oz can lentils
• 1 - 14oz can diced tomatoes
• 1 can (or 1 cup) vegetable/chicken stock
• splash of cooking sherry
• 1 medium onion, chopped
• 2 celery sticks (if large), sliced into bite-sized pieces
• 2 carrots (if large), sliced into bite-sized pieces
• 1 clove garlic, minced
• Italian seasoning (I used dried oregano, parsley, and thyme)
• 1 Tb olive oil

In a large pot, saute the onion, celery, carrots, garlic, and dried seasonings in a tablespoon (or thereabouts) of olive oil until softened. In the meantime, add the lentils, tomatoes, chicken stock, and sherry to a medium-sized pot and bring to a simmer. Add the lentil mixture to the vegetables, bring to a boil, and simmer for about half an hour. Check whether you need to add salt and pepper, then serve on boiled/steamed rice. A small sprinkling of shredded white cheddar cheese is nice on top. I also like a dill pickle on the side.

Serves 4

For more great lentil (and other pulse) recipes, including some by celebrity chefs, check out the Saskatchewan Pulse Growers web site–you can also sign up there to get onto a monthly email recipe mailing list, or buy a copy of their excellent cookbook The Amazing Legume. Saskatchewan farmers grow a lot of lentils, and it would be terrific if everyone in the province ate them at least once a week!

Face the Fear is a series about a dozen things that you can do right now to feel better about what and how you eat.

(photo by Amanda Kelso)

Here’s a fact you might find surprising: how much meat you eat can have the biggest single impact on your personal carbon emissions. That’s right–not your car, not your trip to Mexico, not your house–but your steak.

Meat is one of the most energy-intensive and resource-guzzling foods around. It takes about 2kg of grain to produce 1kg of chicken, 4kg of grain to produce 1kg of pork, and 7kg of grain to produce 1kg of beef. At a time when grain is in short supply around the world, it is very hard to justify continuing to eat the Canadian average of just over 6oz of meat per day.

Here’s a quick indicator of meat’s impact: if Americans, who eat about 8oz meat/day, were to reduce their consumption by a mere 20% (less than one meat-based meal per week), it would have the same impact on carbon emissions as if every car-owner in the States switched from a standard sedan to a Prius.

Industrially-farmed meat–that is, what you usually find in the grocery store–is particularly hard on the environment:

• It takes 8 times as much fossil-fuel energy to produce animal protein as plant protein.
• It takes 3,900 litres of water to produce 1kg of chicken, 4,800 litres of water to produce 1kg of pork, and 15,500 litres of water to produce 1kg of beef.
• 40kg of water- and air-polluting animal waste is created for every 1kg of industrially-produced beef.

By eschewing meat altogether, eating smaller quantities of meat less often, or choosing chicken, lamb, or pork more often than beef, you can cut your carbon emissions dramatically. It will also conserve massive quantities of water, reduce environmental pollution, and free up acreage to grow food for people, not animals. Obviously, some land and some plants/grains are suited only for supporting animals, but I’m not talking about getting rid of livestock full stop–just reducing the excessive and unnecessary consumption of meat that puts huge stresses on the planet and the majority of its poorer inhabitants. Most of our grandparents certainly thought of meat as a treat, and we should too.

You can further improve the environmental impact of your chicken breast or pork chop by avoiding factory-farmed meat and choosing high-quality meat from small-scale local farmers which has been naturally or organically-raised. These animals are raised in much more humane conditions and it shows in the taste. This meat may be more expensive than the dirt-cheap grocery store option, but we have seen again and again that we simply cannot afford to cut corners with meat production. When rock bottom prices become the chief priority for food manufacturers and consumers, can we really be suprised when they start selling us garbage?

I must confess that I just like meat, and I used to eat it pretty much every day. But I stopped buying it at the grocery store quite some time ago after having not just one, but two, bulk packages of hamburger recalled because of suspected e.coli contamination. I had also read Fast Food Nation and was completely horrified to learn how animals were raised, slaughtered, and processed in the industrial meat system. Furthermore, I was living in England during the BSE crisis. As a consequence, I can’t donate blood in Canada and have a small but persistent fear about how long the incubation period for Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) might turn out to be. I now buy meat solely from local farmers and ranchers, and it tastes how the chicken and the beef we used to raise on the farm used to taste.

In the past year I have tried to stick to a meat/vegetarian daily meal rotation, which has reduced my consumption by 50%. I’d like to reduce it even further–although I vividly remember the time that I decided to give up meat entirely when living in London, and by day 3, thought I was going completely insane. Despite huge quantities of plant protein and nuts, I was completely irritable, tearful, and felt utterly on the verge of collapse. Finally, in exasperation, one of my co-workers said to me, ‘For god’s sake, Sue, just go out and get a bacon sandwich!!’ I’m rather sorry to say that it completely did the trick and I have not attempted to go that long without some kind of animal protein again.

Further reading:

• Fast Food Nation by Eric Schlosser
• The Omnivore’s Dilemma by Michael Pollan
• How to Cook Everything Vegetarian by Mark Bitten

(photo by Leslie Duss)

One of the most talked about aspects of eating local food is how it can reduce food miles–the distance that food travels between the farm and your kitchen. The farther your food travels means an increase in the amount of fuel burned, and therefore an increase in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, which many scientists agree contribute to global warming. Therefore, the theory goes, shipping tomatoes 2,000 miles from Mexico or lamb 8,000 miles from New Zealand will always create more CO2 emissions than if you plumped for the local option.

Once I started digging into these claims, however, it became surprisingly apparent that straight food miles don’t always tell the whole story.

Scientists at Lincoln University in New Zealand calculated that lamb shipped from New Zealand actually produced far fewer CO2 emissions than lamb raised locally in the UK. New Zealand lamb produced 688kg/ton of carbon dioxide emissions while British lamb produced 2,849 kg/ton. How on earth can this be possible? Well, New Zealand producers had higher-quality pasture land and more sunshine, which meant that they didn’t have to give their animals supplementary feed, as producers in the UK were forced to—feed which required a lot of extra fertiliser, water, and energy to produce.

A report from the UK’s Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) also found that tomatoes grown in Spain or Israel and shipped to northern Europe produced far fewer GHG emissions than tomatoes grown locally in hothouses. How come? The greenhouses in northern climates needed to be heated in cold weather, which required far more fuel energy than was expended in growing tomatoes in an open field and then shipping them north.

And although air shipment produces the most CO2, the method of production still usually counts way more than the flight alone. Kenyan green beans, produced with entirely manual labour and then flown to the UK, still have a smaller carbon footprint overall than beans produced year-round in heated British greenhouses or even in fields treated with chemical fertilizers and farmed with diesel-burning tractors. The same principle applies closer to home. Sean Cash at the University of Alberta’s Department of Rural Economy estimates that, in the case of produce being shipped to Edmonton supermarkets, transport makes up only 1/3 of food’s CO2 emissions—the rest is taken up with production (figure not cited in this article but is in the actual report, available from the researchers).

So what about those exhaust-belching heavy trucks that transport the vast majority of our food? They do get terrible fuel mileage—10mpg or less—and food trucked in from thousands of miles away has to be refrigerated the whole time, which consumes more energy. In contrast, most farmers bringing produce to the farmers’ market don’t need special refrigerated transport; they simply have to have a truck that’s cool from sitting indoors first thing in the morning. The average half-ton or van travelling to the market once a week could get close to 30mpg on the highway.

But the sad fact is that CO2 savings from buying local produce can be quickly eaten up by the emissions created by customers driving their vehicles to the market (or supermarket). In the UK, cars driving to and from the supermarket create 20% of the total CO2 emissions involved in mass food transport. That percentage would be much higher in the case of locally produced food—if you drive across the city to the market and back, your personal responsibility for those local carrots’ total CO2 emissions will jump to 90% or even higher.

This brings us to the impact of the ‘local loop’, where consumers individually drive to a farm to obtain a locally produced product. Although the individual distance travelled may be relatively short, it quickly adds up to a surprisingly huge number. Say 100 people each make a 30 mile round trip to buy a small quantity of food direct from the farm gate. They have just collectively racked up 3,000 miles on the odometer, when all of their food could have been transported all at once in a larger vehicle in a mere 30-mile round trip! A 6mpg heavy diesel truck is still far more energy-efficient in terms of work accomplished than tens of thousands of people dashing all over town and into the surrounding countryside alone in their gas-guzzling cars, half-tons, and SUVs.

So as you can see, reducing your food miles isn’t as easy as just totting up the mileage. There are a host of highly complicated factors to consider when you pick up that apple or green pepper, including the method of production, the way it was transported, whether you bought it out of season, and even how long it was kept in cold storage (and we’re just talking about produce here–trying to work out the emissions for processed food will really make your head spin). The whole life cycle has to be taken into account–not just how far it has travelled from home.

There are still a lot of very important reasons to buy locally produced food, as I’ll be talking about in future posts. But the quickest way for the average person to make a big reduction in their food’s CO2 emissions? Don’t climb into a car to go and buy it.