A recent NY Times op-ed titled "Math Lessons for Locavores" seems to completely miss the point of locavorism. Most of the article is focused on the view that local eating is energy taxing on our earth and land. What the author fails to realize is that individuals who choose local foods do so for many reasons other than energy savings. Look at the Love Local Food blog description...inspiring people to choose locally produced foods to keep money in our local economy, help local food producers (i.e. create local jobs), and impact our health (when is the last time you saw Twinkies at the farmers' market, and who needs dessert when you've got great tasting produce?)
And, don't forget, eating locally spreads the risk of food safety. What if the individuals in the 20+ states affected were buying eggs from producers in their own states, or community, rather than from two farms in Iowa? (I know, the big industry folks say enough eggs couldn't be produced by small farms, I've heard the arguments.) Sure, they could get food poisoning from eggs from a local producer, but a much smaller number of individuals would be affected because all the eggs would not be coming from one or two locations. So, add smaller outbreaks of food borne illness to the list of reasons to eat locally.
Chicken Update: When reading about the problems with eggs, I learned chickens ingest rodent droppings, which causes them to lay eggs with salmonella inside the egg. Monday I went out to feed our ladies and alas, I found rodent droppings in my bag of feed. So, this food safety inspector and egg production employee purchased a mouse trap. Nope, no salmonella in my eggs, thank you very much (I caught him). How's that for control over the food system?