The Locavore Myth Save The Planet Analysis

966 Words4 Pages
James E. McWilliams takes the opportunity to plead his case against the popular belief that buying food locally can help save the planet in “The Locavore Myth: Why Buying Form Nearby Farmers Won’t Save the Planet” (McWilliams 89). McWilliams finds it necessary to point out that the popular slogan “Buy local, shrink the distance food travels, save the planet” covers the problems with industrialized foods in regards to transportation in his beginning statements. He then follows up by making the bold statement that “a lot of them are making a big mistake” (89). They fail to see that there are other “energy-hogging factors” (89). McWilliams addresses these other factors in his article by looking at lamb in New Zealand, the United Kingdom’s purchase of green beans, the way food miles are calculated, and the lack of information followed by a solution to the shrink the…show more content…
By using reason to back up his thoughts and statements as he did throughout his essay, McWilliams encourages the audience to replace meats on their plates with vegetables. He urges the audience to make this change to their meals because of the amount of energy that is used to produce meat in comparison to plants. A pound of chicken can be produced by 6 pounds of grain while one pound of beef can be produced using 10 to 16 pounds of grain. To grow a tomato, 13 liters of water are required while creating a burger requires 2,400 liters of water. Since the average American consumers 273 pounds of meat each week, McWilliams says to ditch the read meat at least once a week. He captures his ethos in his final statement of his argument while leaving the next step of action up to the audience with the simple statements “If you want to make a statement, ride your bike to the farmer’s market. If you want to reduce greenhouse gases, become a vegetarian”
Open Document