The localvore's dilemma

The Boston Globe tackles the issue of local food, and whether local really is better for the environment. The short answer is, Yes. But that affirmative comes with a big caveat -- and a caveat some proponents don't stress enough. Michael Pollan states it clearly in the article:

Local means local in season.

In places like Charlotte, it means not only summers of fresh tomatoes, green beans, and squash but also January diets focused on the canned versions of those summer favorites along with potatoes that had been stored and some root vegetables thrown in. The article sums up the "dilemma" thusly,

Michael Pollan hastens to point out that eating locally is only part of a larger food ethic. The problem isn't merely, he argues, that we ship our lettuce across the country; the problem is that people living in New England, a place naturally unfriendly to large-scale lettuce production, feel entitled to eat lettuce in February. Before World War II, he points out, Americans ate locally and in season because they had no choice.

"It's a new idea," he says, "this expectation that we can have a salad all year round."

Roughly two generations (out of what, 10,000 or more?) of human actions/attitudes that have to be reversed. Can we do that?