Comments SnoDragon has made

Food as art? Yes, but also no!

I disagree with Ted. Quite vehemently, actually. Food is sometimes art, but in schools it could be taught as a craft, much like shop class or ceramics. If you know how to make it, you can do it for yourself (Oh how much I wish I had taken car mechanics in high school!) and often do it better than those so-called "snazzy restaurants," which often or not pander just as much crap as the schools. Simple food, with quality (but not necessarily expensive) ingredients and well-executed is something that we can give our children and not have to worry so much about childhood obesity and type 2 diabetes.

Unlike Waters, I think that the kind of food she's talking about (though maybe lighter on the arugula and grass-fed lamb and heavier on seasonal produce and cheaper but fresher cuts of meat) is certainly obtainable for less than $5 per child per day.

I also really like the idea of using culinary school grads in school kitchens. I've got a lot of friends in the food industry and it is TOUGH to pay off those loans unless you start your own restaurant and are a resounding success at it. Plus, some might like it enough to want to stay!

I agree with Tom on the educational aspects of changing our School Lunch programs and I hope to see school lunch someday mean more than hamburger casserole and tater tots.

As for the Romans eating like Romans? Kids learn about nutrition not so much directly from their parents, these days, as from the advertisements they see on TV and the cheap restaurants (McDonald's, Burger King, etc.) that their underpaid, overworked parents frequent because they don't have the time to cook or the money for better restaurant choices. If school could teach kids (and parents, too!) that good food was more than grease and sugar, we'd really be on to something.

Here's hoping...On For the first time in decades, a healthy school-lunch debate opens posted 9 months ago 10 Responses

Local infrastructure and Cook for America!

Wow, two really great solutions to big problems! I'm an advocate of creative and sustainable rural development and have long thought that reviving local butchers and meat lockers as well as things like community canning centers and places to flash freeze fresh produce would be good ideas as they would cut down on transportation costs, allow for small-scale usage, and help with the storage issues that arise when one grows or buys produce locally and/or in-season.

As for the cooking-school-grad program (which I think should be called Cook for America!), I think it's a great idea. But there also need to be professionals trained in menu planning, budgeting, and nutrition in charge.

I think Michael Pollan is absolutely correct in pointing out that by addressing many of our issues with food, we can solve or alleviate other problems caused by or indirectly affected by our industrial agriculture. I also strongly believe that a new agricultural policy should focus on smaller and medium-sized family farms and reward them for efforts toward sustainability, while making it harder for large, conglomerate factory farms to survive (or at least bringing their prices up, particularly of processed foods, to reflect real costs!).

Thanks for another great article, Tom!On Think Locally, Act Infrastructurally posted 10 months, 3 weeks ago 14 Responses

Whole Foods or whole foods?

I still shop at a regular supermarket (I am after all, very poor and there isn't much in the way of farmers' markets around here until later in the season), but my indulgences are fresh fruits & veg, not electronics. Though I have racheted down spending on meat. I'm always amazed to see people walking around the grocery store with their carts full of processed foods, whereas the only processed food in my cart is generally bread and the ocassional box of cereal or plain pasta (sometimes I splurge on ice cream or frozen pierogies).

Maybe if people learned to cook (even at the basic level that I'm at: baking and pan-frying meats & veg, steaming & blanching, liberal seasonings, few sauces) using fresh ingredients and took a little more time doing it, we wouldn't have so much value-added "food-like products" to spend oodles of money on.

Then maybe we could eat better and more healthily and STILL have some extra pocket change to save up for that iPod, or to splurge on guilty pop chart pleasures on iTunes.On What people cling to when the going gets tough posted 1 year, 4 months ago 6 Responses

Community Foods Projects!

While I agree that subsidies for large-scale corporate farming need to be eliminated, programs such as the UDSA's CSREES Community Foods Projects are crucial to launching small-scale farming and production, especially in urban and suburban areas.

And no, I don't work for the CSREES, but I was invited to apply for their Community Foods Project grant to help out our up-and-coming community gardens. And we'd like to open a farmer's market. Alas, funding is tied up in the current Farm Bill.

So I don't know what I would do: vote or veto? Luckily, I am neither in Congress nor President. Of course, whichever way the Farm Bill goes, there will always be those who are never satisfied.On How should sustainable-food advocates respond to the latest farm bill proposal? posted 1 year, 6 months ago 25 Responses

Fabulous... for the homeowners

Tom, I love your articles, and the guest article was also very good regarding kitchen gardens. However, there's one important component missing: not everyone owns (or even rents) houses with yards. In fact, quite a few of us, myself included, live in apartments.

So maybe the key to home veg production is not only kitchen gardens, but also community, urban, and rooftop gardens. Because it's hard to grow veggies like squash or carrots in a pot on your balcony, even if it gets plenty of sun like mine.

And how about putting gardening in the science curricula of middle school and high school students? And I don't mean growing bean plants in a styrofoam cup. Gardening should be a life skill, like driving and balancing a checkbook.

Just a thought. On A bright trend for dark times: kitchen gardening posted 1 year, 7 months ago 26 Responses

Local, not gourmet

Slow Food may be a tad too focused on the gourmet, but the origins of local food are inherently based in the rural and often impoverished. The reason why we have species diversity in fruit and veggies is not so much because people wanted different flavors and tastes, but because they needed varieties that could grow in their respective climates.

Slow Food is also not about the uber-expensive so much as about using whole foods (no, not Whole Foods, but the unprocessed). And raw food materials are relatively cheap (except for imported produce and ocassionally meat). Purchasing whole grains and growing your own veggies is pretty damn cheap in terms of money. The expense is in time.

McDonald's actually started out as something for the more well-off (my parents remember getting McD's as an occasional treat, because it was expensive) and with the rise of agribiz and agribiz subsidies, degenerated into cheap, low-quality, high-quantity trash.

Maybe we should invest the money from agribiz subsidies in small family farms and urban and suburban community gardens. Then everyone could afford fresh, local, varietally diverse produce.

Besides, what could be more elitist than a super-rich, multinational, corporate monopoly? As opposed to localized, democratized, diversified food production and consumption?On Responding to a wrongheaded assault on Slow Food posted 1 year, 8 months ago 4 Responses

To the Candidates:

Many of our environmental problems, including global climate change, stem from our habit of overconsumption and overproduction. In a country where consumerism is a status symbol, do you think that radical changes need to be made in the way we live in order to "save the environment?" If so, what changes do you propose? If not, how do you propose we reconcile our living habits with global climate change and other environmental issues?On Leave suggestions in comments posted 2 years ago 35 Responses

Who said farming was easy?

It's not. Even conventional ag is one of the hardest and least-appreciated jobs on the planet, especially when done by family farmers. The pay sucks, the stress level is astronomical, and everything depends on one or two cash crops affected by such unpredictable variables as rain, drought, hail, flood, early frost, high winds, etc. Not to mention market variables, debt, and the skyrocketing cost of huge machinery.

Organic agriculture (and more importantly, sustainable ag) does take more managing. But that's the trade-off for not eating poisons on a daily basis.

And contrary to popular belief, farmers are not stupid. Though they are extremely cautious, and so are generally reluctant to take up any newfangled idea until it has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that it works and works well. Hence the lack of organic farming in the U.S.

I'd like to note that just because it takes three years to become USDA certified organic, doesn't mean that there isn't a market for pesticide-free food. You just have to find local, instead of corporate, markets.

I personally would like to see lots of small, sustainable family farms that are well-managed and have local and regional markets. If we can do that, I think we can "feed the world" far better than industrial factory farming ever can.  On Another study shows organic ag outpacing conventional posted 2 years ago 16 Responses

WTF, DOE?

If one walked up one flight of stairs and down two, would one not be a floor lower than originally intended? And would one have not just wasted a lot of personal energy in doing so? Wouldn't walking down one flight of stairs just make so much more sense to the same end?

I do not see the logic of that rule.

On a related note: does Bush even know the meanings of the words "whereof" and "hereunto?" And isn't "in the year of our Lord" a violation of separation of church and state?

The pointlessness of the Bush Administration's rhetoric is mind-boggling.On October is Energy Awareness Month posted 2 years, 1 month ago 3 Responses

Local based on locality

I don't think anyone is suggesting that people live solely off of locally-produced food. As a resident of the Upper Midwest, where 6 month winters often prevail, I understand that in January, a local-only diet would be relegated solely to frozen, dried, and canned goods. Which would suck somewhat.

At the same time, there is much to be said for eating locally. Different regions of the U.S. have different growing seasons and different climates (duh), so this means that different varieties of crops must be grown to accomodate the climate distinctions. So instead of only Red Delicious apples (P.S. Ewww), we could have hundreds of varieties of apples, each hardy and disease-resistant to their own area. Like the example of the Irish potato famine, genetically similar mono-crops are susceptible to disease. Whereas eating locally encourages biodiversity and food security.

Another important point about eating local is quality of food. When you buy a tomato from the farmer's market in July from a farmer who lives 10 miles away and who picked it that morning, that tomato is pretty damn ripe. That means it probably has a higher nutritional content. And it tastes better too. Supermarket produce is picked before it's ripe because of how long it has to travel/wait before it reaches the shelves. And it's bred to travel well, which ususally does nothing for the taste quotient. Nor for the nutritional content.

I hope I live to see the day where people subsist primarily on local and regional foods, visiting the grocery store only to buy foods that are impossible to grow locally. For us it would be primarily tropical and mediterranean fruits like oranges, banannas, or figs, and maybe seafood or exotic cheeses and spices. In other words, non-essential, but yummy foods.

And don't give me that class-gap, luxury food crap. Fruits and vegetables are currently "luxury" foods to thousands of Americans who can't afford them. Locally produced food could help change that.

Eating local has a rich history (heirloom produce, anyone?) and is rooted in our cultural traditions. I don't think it's just a passing fad. Fads are usually flawed on a basic level (the Atkin's diet, anyone?) and therefore can't last. Locally produced food is anything but.On 'Extreme localism' in the New Yorker posted 2 years, 2 months ago 12 Responses

Sustainability is just as important as location

Obviously, local is better in terms of energy output. But if it's a choice between sustainably grown produce from 400 miles away and pesticide-laden local produce, I'd choose sustainable. The output of energy to transport sustainable produce is far outweighed by the environmental impacts of locally produced food using corporate, conventional agriculture (not that that would be sold locally anyway, but whatever).

I do agree with the need to revitalize the rail system. Talk about efficient packing! Reducing the use of semi trucking would also reduce the wear and tear on our interstate highway system (and bridges... Minneapolis, anyone?) in addition to reducing air pollution.

The Economist and The New York Times obviously don't get that the MOST important factor in buying local is getting to know your producer. That way even if they aren't USDA certified organic, you can get to know their growing practices and decide whether or not you want to buy from them.

And there's something to be said for eating seasonally. You wouldn't (or rather, shouldn't) give a child candy every time s/he demands it (which is likely every five seconds), so why should Americans get out-of season produce on-demand? The impacts far outweigh the gratification.On If buying locally isn't the answer, then what is? posted 2 years, 3 months ago 28 Responses

For once, I'm undecided

I usually have strong views on candidates, but this time around I don't know. Edwards talks the enviro talk, but can he walk the walk? I'm glad that he understands that coal = bad, even when liquified, but the corn thing still bothers me.

And why won't anyone address big agribiz in the same way as big oil? They amount to about the same and have similarly destructive tendencies.

Also, how will Africa grow crops for biofuels when much of it is gasping for enough water to keep its populace alive, much less prospering? Desertification is another issue that needs to be addressed. How about a freeze on building new golf courses and fountains in desert areas and Flordia until wetlands to refill the aquifers can be restored?

Oh, and to theBike45: I really don't think Al Gore's son is the best judge of character right now.On An interview with John Edwards about his presidential platform on energy and the environment posted 2 years, 4 months ago 15 Responses

Tropics v. Northerly climes

Tropical rainforests are important simply because they are below the equator. It doesn't matter as much how many trees you plant up north because that's where the bulk of the earth's vegetation is anyway. It matters down south because tropical and sub-tropical rainforests are pretty much the only thing suckng up all the CO2 we northerners emit when we crank up the heat in the winter and drive everywhere because it is cold.

Rainforest does not = "lungs of the earth." But maybe, air filter of winter?On Dirt cheap carbon posted 2 years, 5 months ago 30 Responses

North Dakota accent

Hmmmkay, I don't know what jabailo thinks a ND accent sounds like it, but his version is definitely NOT it. Oh, and the Senator's last name is Dorgan, not Davies.

There is a deficit of efficiency in nearly every aspect of the average American life. And since our society is so addicted to and dependent upon cars, they seem a likely choice for increasing efficiency. After all, we know it can be done, it's just a matter of Big Auto stopping all the whining and actually listening to the consumer instead of trying to force what it wants down the consumer's throat.

And as a consumer, I want a car that gets 100+ miles per gallon. Without having to be a hypermiler.

Also, Dorgan = wicked awesome. I should know, I voted for him.On Use this one to win every argument posted 2 years, 5 months ago 8 Responses

Salt water

I, too, have heard about and read articles about saline pools. They're supposed to be better for your skin (soft water) and the salt content makes it difficult if not impossible for dangerous bacteria to survive.

Saline pools can be cheaper than chlorine pools, too, because you don't have to buy expensive chemicals and check the pH constantly.

If I ever have a pool, I want it to be a saline one.

If you're going to do lakes or rivers, make sure they're not polluted (or, as unpolluted as possible)! Swimming in a river just downstream from a paper mill would be far worse than swimming in a chlorine pool. Think of all the bleach and dioxins!

Maybe the mom could take her kids to a spa instead? :)On Umbra on chlorine posted 2 years, 8 months ago 13 Responses

Curing the 'flu, among other things

I completely agree with the whole female empowerment and availability of contraceptives thing. Universal healthcare can be messy, so I'd tread carefully there. Same with debt forgiveness.

Here are a few of my ideas:

• Try to contain the spread of affluenza and curb our throw-away habit. The dichotomy between super-rich and super-poor is awful, too.

• Take all those farm subsidies away from big agribiz and reroute them to small-scale farmers, preferably organic. Also, pump some of that money into establishing local food systems and encouraging CSA. And ban GMOs. Big agribiz won't last long without artifically cheap corn. Might go a long way to helping NAFTA issues and America's obesity problems, too.

• Fair trade. Enough said. Because "free trade" is far from free.