> Driving something around on a truck does not necessarily translate into a 
> big relative expenditure of energy, particularily if the payload will 
> result in a considerable increase in yield...

Carbon footprints, global warming, globalization, peak oil, energy 
efficiency; these matters are not at all simple, but often subjected to 
gross oversimplification.

Value judgements -- both personal and group -- are central to positions 
taken in each argument but, however, many of the underlying facts are 
unproven and probably improvable.  Therefore any conclusions are necessarily 
tentative and justly suspected of being highly subjective.  Often they 
appear to be blatantly political.

It seems to me that, while attempts to reconcile these matters are 
necessarily inconclusive, the process of considering them can yield some 
insights and strategies.  To that end, let me point out that the energy 
value of food is primarily of importance at a subsistence level, but in 
developed countries, high energy content of foods is often considered 
undesirable.  Other qualities -- non-energy nutrient content, or the nature 
of these other nutrients is of more interest.

If looking at the energy conversion from fossil fuel calories to food energy 
proves somewhat irrelevant, then other approaches can be taken, such as an 
economic evaluation.  The problem there is the same, however.  There are no 
absolutes, guesses must be made, and the future cannot be seen. 

******************************************************
* Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at:          *
* http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm  *
******************************************************