Eating frozen fish instead of fresh is better for the environment. That's according to a new Portland based study.
The three-year study was spearheaded by Portland based Ecotrust. It tracked the environmental impacts of fresh salmon versus the environmental impacts of frozen salmon.
It followed the fish from the sea to the plate. The study found fresh salmon has about twice the environmental impact as frozen salmon.
The reasons: Ships burn a lot of diesel fuel chasing the fish across the sea. Then, fresh fish are often put on planes and flown long distances burning more fuel.
"The amount of diesel fuel it takes to produce a salmon fillet in one of those capture fisheries out on the ocean tends to be on the order of a gallon of fuel ... imagine having a gallon of diesel fuel with your steak," said Astrid Scholz, Ecotrust researcher and co-author of the study.
The study says that salmon frozen at sea can be transported by freighter or train which burn less fossil fuel. And don't think farmed salmon is any better. The study found it also has hidden environmental costs.
"In the farmed system, there's a lot of inputs that tends to be petroleum intense that go into the production of feeds that go into the production of farmed salmon," said Scholz.
Of course there are many fresh salmon found out there who will dispute the findings.
Larry McDonald only eats fresh salmon, never frozen.
"I'm just wondering how much energy refrigerator ships generate as they cruise around freezing things. That's like having a floating ice box," said McDonald.
The study points out that living in the Pacific Northwest is a benefit since we can get fresh salmon without flying it in. But researchers say most fresh salmon is air-freighted and it's something we need to think about the next time we head to the fish counter.
