The issues of cutting our energy use and agreeing on solutions acceptable to all nations seem to be as far away as ever despite preliminary talks in China ahead of the next Climate Change Summit due to be held at the end of November in Cancun, Mexico.
It seems that as individuals many of us are far more willing to do our bit to reduce our energy consumption in whatever way we can and are doing all the now increasingly common things like installing energy-saving light bulbs, switching electrical equipment off rather than leaving it on standby and sorting our rubbish to be able to recycle more of it.
But what about food? It is increasingly common to see people carrying re-usable bags when doing the weekly shopping and, of course more are "buying local" although calculating the carbon footprint and energy consumption of food production is less clear-cut than simply buying local would suggest. There are also other ways of being more energy efficient when it comes to food.
Eating less meat is the most obvious example because it is generally acknowledged to be the most energy inefficient form of food production.
But a recent economic analysis of growing genetically modified crops from the USA has found that the farmers who benefited most were not those who chose to grow GM but those who didn't.
It focused on a particular pest for growers of maize, the corn borer moth. Farmers who were growing from GM seed that contained a bacterial gene that caused the plants to give off a protein toxic to the moths had benefited from the resulting decline in the pests but it was the farmers not using the GM seed who gained the most economically.
This was because they not only benefited from the area-wide impact of the pest reduction in the GM crops but also because their production costs were lower as they were not paying the technology fees that are part of the costs of buying the genetically modified seed.
If the farmers pass on some of that cost saving to consumers it could also be a cost benefit to environmentally conscious shoppers, many of whom in Europe and the UK are in any case very suspicious of genetic modification and look for more natural or organic products.
Similarly if farmers used the newer ranges of low-chem biopesticides, biofungicides and yield enhancers being produced by biopesticides developers, which enable them to farm sustainably and economically, in theory consumers should also benefit from lower prices in the supermarkets.
There are also ways that individuals can do their bit for the environment when it comes to cooking in the home.
In addition to buying and consuming less meat and making sure left-overs are put to good use, cooking on gas is more environmentally friendly than with electricity.
Other ideas include planning meals that can be cooked in the oven rather than using several burners as well, and also preparing and cooking more than one meal in the oven, which has the added bonus that you come home from work to a ready-prepared meal that only has to be warmed up and as they say, every little helps.
Author Resource:
Efficient farming using low-chem agricultural products from Biopesticides Developers and clever menu planning and efficient cooking by consumers can help reduce energy consumption while nations continue to disagree about climate change action, says consumer writer Ali Withers
![[Valid RSS feed]](http://www.articlecoop.com/images/icon_Rss.png "XML Feed For RSS"){kind=icon}
Category Rss Feed
Print This Article
Add To Favorites
