[Imc] the fridge

[Mike Lehman]

Jacqueline,
Hmmmm, refrigerators- a complicated subject in modern times...

Jacqueline Waters wrote:
> 
> Just a quick comment or two, do what you will with them:
> 
> 1)  not that they are likely to find out, but storing food in non-industrial
> freezers and refridgerators and then selling it to the public is big-time
> against health code.  The IMC can ignore this if they want to, that's your
> business, but I just thought maybe people didn't know and would appreciate
> the info.  Any operation, non-for-profit or otherwise, selling food to the
> public has to adhere to the code, no operation too small.  I have learned
> this by experience working in small operations that carried food for sale.

I'm not so sure about this one. It sounds to me like you're talking
about operations where food is prepared and stored by the operation
itself. In this case, you are correct. However, the IMC is not engaged
in such an operation, as we are selling only packaged food that has not
been processed at all by the IMC.

In my 25 years in food wholesaling (don't get me started), I've never
come across a need for anything other than regular monitoring of storage
for pre-packaged food. If you've been in a supermarket lately (and you
may not have been) you may have noticed small freezers used for floor
displays. These are just like the one we are proposing to buy, except
that they often have clear, plastic doors so that the public can see
what's for sale. Just the same as what we propose, except less efficient
at long term storage. I don't see a crusade by the health dept. to
remove them.

Which doesn't mean that we shouldn't have some sort of monitoring. This
can be accomplished by staff filling out a form where a thermometer is
read and then recorded once a day. That may be a good idea.
 
> If the IMC were interested in persuing the obtaining of a used fridge or
> freezer that would be up to health code standards I could suggest many
> locally owned operations that specialize in food service refridgeration that
> sell used models, often at a good prices.  Contact me if there is any
> interest.

We tried our one contact in this area without luck. I'm open to
suggestions, but I still think that we are OK with what is proposed, as
noted above. Affordability is a big issue. Even good, used stuff like
what you're talking about will put this out of reach for us, period.

> 2)  I haven't even finished paying for my membership yet so maybe my opinion
> shouldn't be put out here at this point, but what the heck - why is the IMC
> planning to purchase a new appliance from a mega-corp.?  I realize it's
> cheaper - that is how Walmart and related evil empires get otherwise
> consciencious (exuse my spelling) people to buy from them - becasue they
> make it cheaper for those who can barely afford their needs as it is.  I
> guess that is the IMC's reason - hey, it's a tight budget and there is so
> much that needs to be done with it.  I can see that.  I also have to say,
> personally, that logic makes me very uncomfortable and plays straight to the
> mindset that makes corp.s fat, rich and powerful.  It's a little extra money
> that can't really be afforded, but maybe the moral compromise involved
> should be figured into the cost.  Then again, it's just a fridge, right, and
> I'm dickering about details. . . right?

Well, I don't think we're going to find a freezer or fridge that IS NOT
MADE by a big corporation. I suppose we could set up a primitive
refrigeration system, with ammonia in crude pipes, powered by a
volunteer on a treadmill. I don't think it will ever keep ice cream cold
and it would definitely NOT be approved by the health folks for any such
purpose.

As for where we shop, I'm open to other suggestions, but I don't believe
that the chains have left any small businesses from which to buy. It a
little like the gasoline message that went out earlier. Sure, we can
give up gasoline until the revolution, and maybe afterwards, too, but I
don't think we'd do anything but hobble ourselves by doing so. I
purposely avoided Walmart, but you simply can't avoid "megacorps" for
some of the essentials of life. I don't wish to argue with you about the
wisdom of your approach, but I'd suggest that there are certain things
in life that aren't worth moralizing over too much.

On the other hand, I believe that any real moral compromising can't be
quantified, so trying to convert it into X$ saved is a little beyond
what I'm willing to do.

If we do want to go that route, we should consider the amount of energy
saved be new technology in refrigeration over what we were using before
the old quit. Another factor is the whole issue of freon, which will be
a lot more enviromentally friendly in the new. I could give us all a
treatise in this whole area, but I bet most aren't interested other than
to note it is a lot less destructive to the ozone in case of a leak. And
we could go on with the relative moral comparisons ad infinitum...

But everything in life is a compromise in some way or another. I think,
on balance, that we are taking the best approach within the limited
resources at our disposal.

> 
> Anyway, thanks for hearing me out,
> 
> Jacqueline Waters

I don't mean to be critical, but I think this is a good point to remind
people that getting involved with the different working groups at the
IMC if you feel strongly about a particular issue is very important. As
a group that operates based on a loose autonomous consensus, it is
important to be involved at the beginning of the process, rather than
being a naysayer at the end. It avoids undermining the work that others
do to know upfront what people's objections might be. I really don't
have a strong feeling one way or the other on this one- I haven't bought
anything frozen to eat at the IMC yet anyway, but I hope to have the
opportunity sometime, if it doesn't turn into an impractical project
that people can only disagree over.

Mike Lehman