[FoxtrotGolfXray 5.0]

Originally Posted by GasoLane

We had a fairly large (French owned) wool combing plant here which closed some years.

I read somewhere that China could scour wool for 28c a kilo, but here it cost $1.75.

All the while there is a cost difference like that Companies will always look for cheaper offshore alternatives.

But hey, we can still suck all the water from the Darling and the Murrumbidgee and grow the stuff.

Off topic, I know, but reminds me of the Lakes Entrance prawn fisherman who sends his produce overseas for processing. It is cheaper to fly the fresh caught produce overseas, have it processed and then returned than it is to process it here.

Or the Lakes Entrance fish and chip shop that used fresh local Co-op caught fish. Except that all the product was trucked to Melbourne before distribution (because it was more cost effective). Hence, it was then trucked back to Lakes Entrance to the retailer.

With the increasing focus on human impact on our environment, I think the time will come where a product discloses the amount of energy that has gone into providing a product on the shelf for the consumer. This will assist those who wish to reduce their footprint to make better informed decisions, not dissimilar to the food health ratings we currently have.

If/when this eventuates, the concept of sending items offshore for processing will become less palatable for the environmentally-conscious public, and I think this will drive the biggest turnaround in consumer behaviour.