Why Our Food is So Dependent on Oil

Why Our Food is So Dependent on Oil

312 Energy April 2, 2005

http://www.321energy.com/editorials/church/church040205.html

by Norman Church

April 2nd, 2005

"Concentrate on what cannot lie. The evidence..." -- Gil Grissom

INTRODUCTION

------------------------------------------------------------------

"Eating Oil" was the title of a book which was

published in 1978 following the first oil crisis

in 1973 (1). The aim of the book was to

investigate the extent to which food supply in

industrialised countries relied on fossil fuels.

In the summer of 2000 the degree of dependence on

oil in the UK food system was demonstrated once

again when protestors blockaded oil refineries

and fuel distribution depots. The fuel crises

disrupted the distribution of food and industry

leaders warned that their stores would be out of

food within days. The lessons of 1973 have not

been heeded.

Today the food system is even more reliant on

cheap crude oil. Virtually all of the processes

in the modern food system are now dependent upon

this finite resource, which is nearing its

depletion phase.

Moreover, at a time when we should be making

massive cuts in the emissions of greenhouse gases

into the atmosphere in order to reduce the threat

posed by climate change, the food system is

lengthening its supply chains and increasing

emissions to the point where it is a significant

contributor to global warming.

The organic sector could be leading the

development of a sustainable food system. Direct

environmental and ecological impacts of

agriculture 'on the farm' are certainly reduced

in organic systems. However, global trade and

distribution of organic products fritter away

those benefits and undermine its leadership role.

Not only is the contemporary food system

inherently unsustainable, increasingly, it is

damaging the environment.

The systems that produce the world's food supply

are heavily dependent on fossil fuels. Vast

amounts of oil and gas are used as raw materials

and energy in the manufacture of fertilisers and

pesticides, and as cheap and readily available

energy at all stages of food production: from

planting, irrigation, feeding and harvesting,

through to processing, distribution and

packaging. In addition, fossil fuels are

essential in the construction and the repair of

equipment and infrastructure needed to facilitate

this industry, including farm machinery,

processing facilities, storage, ships, trucks and

roads. The industrial food supply system is one

of the biggest consumers of fossil fuels and one

of the greatest producers of greenhouse gases.

Ironically, the food industry is at serious risk

from global warming caused by these greenhouse

gases, through the disruption of the predictable

climactic cycles on which agriculture depends.

But global warming can have the more pronounced

and immediate effect of exacerbating existing

environmental threats to agriculture, many of

which are caused by industrial agriculture

itself. Environmental degradation, water

shortages, salination, soil erosion, pests,

disease and desertification all pose serious

threats to our food supply, and are made worse by

climate change. But many of the conventional ways

used to overcome these environmental problems

further increase the consumption of finite oil

and gas reserves. Thus the cycle of oil

dependence and environmental degradation

continues.

Industrial agriculture and the systems of food

supply are also responsible for the erosion of

communities throughout the world. This social

degradation is compounded by trade rules and

policies, by the profit driven mindset of the

industry, and by the lack of knowledge of the

faults of the current systems and the

possibilities of alternatives. But the

globalisation and corporate control that

seriously threaten society and the stability of

our environment are only possible because cheap

energy is used to replace labour and allows the

distance between producer and consumer to be

extended.

However, this is set to change. Oil output is

expected to peak in the next few years and

steadily decline thereafter. We have a very poor

understanding of how the extreme fluctuations in

the availability and cost of both oil and natural

gas will affect the global food supply systems,

and how they will be able to adapt to the

decreasing availability of energy. In the near

future, environmental threats will combine with

energy scarcity to cause significant food

shortages and sharp increases in prices - at the

very least. We are about to enter an era where we

will have to once again feed the world with

limited use of fossil fuels. But do we have

enough time, knowledge, money, energy and

political power to make this massive

transformation to our food systems when they are

already threatened by significant environmental

stresses and increasing corporate control?

The modern, commercial agricultural miracle that

feeds all of us, and much of the rest of the

world, is completely dependent on the flow,

processing and distribution of oil, and

technology is critical to maintaining that flow.

Oil refined for gasoline and diesel is critical

to run the tractors, combines and other farm

vehicles and equipment that plant, spray the

herbicides and pesticides, and harvest/transport

food and seed Food processors rely on the

just-in-time (gasoline-based) delivery of fresh

or refrigerated food Food processors rely on the

production and delivery of food additives,

including vitamins and minerals, emulsifiers,

preservatives, colouring agents, etc. Many are

oil-based. Delivery is oil-based Food processors

rely on the production and delivery of boxes,

metal cans, printed paper labels, plastic trays,

cellophane for microwave/convenience foods, glass

jars, plastic and metal lids with sealing

compounds. Many of these are essentially

oil-based Delivery of finished food products to

distribution centres in refrigerated trucks.

Oil-based, daily, just-in-time shipment of food

to grocery stores, restaurants, hospitals,

schools, etc., all oil-based; customer drives to

grocery store to shop for supplies, often several

times a week

ENERGY, TRANSPORT AND THE FOOD SYSTEM

Our food system is energy inefficient...

One indicator of the unsustainability of the

contemporary food system is the ratio of energy

outputs - the energy content of a food product

(calories) - to the energy inputs.

The latter is all the energy consumed in

producing, processing, packaging and distributing

that product. The energy ratio (energy out/energy

in) in agriculture has decreased from being close

to 100 for traditional pre-industrial societies

to less than 1 in most cases in the present food

system, as energy inputs, mainly in the form of

fossil fuels, have gradually increased.

However, transport energy consumption is also

significant, and if included in these ratios

would mean that the ratio would decrease further.

For example, when iceberg lettuce is imported to

the UK from the USA by plane, the energy ratio is

only 0.00786. In other words 127 calories of

energy (aviation fuel) are needed to transport 1

calorie of lettuce across the Atlantic. If the

energy consumed during lettuce cultivation,

packaging, refrigeration, distribution in the UK

and shopping by car was included, the energy

needed would be even higher. Similarly, 97

calories of transport energy are needed to import

1 calorie of asparagus by plane from Chile, and

66 units of energy are consumed when flying 1

unit of carrot energy from South Africa.

Just how energy inefficient the food system is

can be seen in the crazy case of the Swedish

tomato ketchup. Researchers at the Swedish

Institute for Food and Biotechnology analysed the

production of tomato ketchup (2). The study

considered the production of inputs to

agriculture, tomato cultivation and conversion to

tomato paste (in Italy), the processing and

packaging of the paste and other ingredients into

tomato ketchup in Sweden and the retail and

storage of the final product. All this involved

more than 52 transport and process stages.

The aseptic bags used to package the tomato paste

were produced in the Netherlands and transported

to Italy to be filled, placed in steel barrels,

and then moved to Sweden. The five layered, red

bottles were either produced in the UK or Sweden

with materials form Japan, Italy, Belgium, the

USA and Denmark. The polypropylene (PP) screw-cap

of the bottle and plug, made from low density

polyethylene (LDPE), was produced in Denmark and

transported to Sweden. Additionally, LDPE

shrink-film and corrugated cardboard were used to

distribute the final product. Labels, glue and

ink were not included in the analysis.

This example demonstrates the extent to which the

food system is now dependent on national and

international freight transport. However, there

are many other steps involved in the production

of this everyday product. These include the

transportation associated with: the production

and supply of nitrogen, phosphorous and potassium

fertilisers; pesticides; processing equipment;

and farm machinery. It is likely that other

ingredients such as sugar, vinegar, spices and

salt were also imported. Most of the processes

listed above will also depend on derivatives of

fossil fuels. This product is also likely to be

purchased in a shopping trip by car.

...is dependent on oil...

One study has estimated that UK imports of food

products and animal feed involved transportation

by sea, air and road amounting to over 83 billion

tonne-kilometres (3). This required 1.6 billion

litres of fuel and, based on a conservative

figure of 50 grams of carbon dioxide per

tonne-kilometre resulted in 4.1 million tonnes of

carbon dioxide emissions (4). Within the UK, the

amount of food transported increased by 16% and

the distances travelled by 50% between 1978 and

1999.

It has been estimated that the CO2 emissions

attributable to producing, processing, packaging

and distributing the food consumed by a family of

four is about 8 tonnes a year (5)

..and is unnecessarily contributing to carbon emissions.

It is not that this transportation is critical or

necessary. In many cases countries import and

export similar quantities of the same food

products (6). A recent report has highlighted the

instances in which countries import and export

large quantities of particular foodstuffs (6).

For example, in 1997, 126 million litres of

liquid milk was imported into the UK and, at the

same time, 270 million litres of milk was

exported from the UK. 23,000 tonnes of milk

powder was imported into the UK and 153,000

tonnes exported (7). UK milk imports have doubled

over the last 20 years, but there has been a

four-fold increase in UK milk exports over the

last 30 years (8).

Britain imports 61,400 tonnes of poultry meat a

year from the Netherlands and exports 33,100

tonnes to the Netherlands. We import 240,000

tonnes of pork and 125,000 tonnes of lamb while

exporting 195,000 tonnes of pork and 102,000

tonnes of lamb (6).

This system is unsustainable, illogical, and

bizarre and can only exist as long as inexpensive

fossil fuels are available and we do not take

significant action to reduce carbon dioxide

emissions.

GLOBAL WARMING AND FINITE OIL

The threat of global warming and the need to reduce carbon emissions

The nearness of the depletion stage of oil supplies

Discovery of oil and gas peaked in the 1960s.

Production is set to peak too, with five Middle

Eastern countries regaining control of world

supply (9). Almost two-thirds of the world's

total reserves of crude oil are located in the

Middle East, notably in Saudi Arabia, Iran and

Iraq (10). An assessment of future world oil

supply and its depletion pattern shows that

between 1980 and 1998 there was an 11.2 per cent

increase in world crude oil production, from 59.6

to 66.9 million barrels of oil per day (10).

Current world production rates are about 25 Gb

(billion barrels) per year. A simple calculation

shows that if consumption levels remain constant,

world crude oil reserves, at approximately 1

trillion barrels, could be exhausted around 2040

(11).

The oil crises of the 1970s when the Organisation

of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) states

reined in their production have passed into folk

memory. However, they were accompanied by massive

disruption and global economic recession. The

same happened in 1980 and 1991 (12).

Colin J. Campbell, a pre-eminent oil industry

analyst, believes that future crises will be much

worse. "The oil shocks of the 1970s were

short-lived because there were then plenty of new

oil and gas finds to bring on stream. This time

there are virtually no new prolific basins to

yield a crop of giant fields sufficient to have a

global impact. The growing Middle East control of

the market is likely to lead to a radical and

permanent increase in the price of oil, before

physical shortages begin to appear within the

first decade of the 21st century. The world's

economy has been driven by an abundant supply of

cheap oil-based energy for the best part of this

century. The coming oil crisis will accordingly

be an economic and political discontinuity of

historic proportions, as the world adjusts to a

new energy environment" (9).

The three main purposes for which oil is used

worldwide are food, transport and heating. In the

near future the competition for oil for these

three activities will be raw and real. An energy

famine is likely to affect poorer countries

first, when increases in the cost of paraffin,

used for cooking, place it beyond their reach.

Following the peak in production, food supplies

all over the world will begin to be disrupted,

not only because of price increases but because

the oil will no longer be there.

IS ORGANIC ANY DIFFERENT?

The organic system is more energy efficient to the farm gate...

One of the benefits of organic production is that

energy consumption and, therefore, fossil fuel

consumption and greenhouse gas emissions, are

less than that in conventional systems.

The energy used in food production is separated

into direct and indirect inputs. Indirect inputs

include the manufacture and supply of pesticides,

feedstuffs and fertilisers while direct energy

inputs are those on the farm, such as machinery.

One measure of the energy efficiency of food

production that allows a comparison between

different farming practices is the energy

consumed per unit output, often expressed as the

energy consumed per tonne of food produced

(MJ/tonne) or the energy consumed per kilogram of

food (MJ/kg).

A study comparing organic and conventional

livestock, dairy, vegetable and arable systems in

the UK found that, with average yields, the

energy saving with organic production ranged from

0.14 MJ/kg to 1.79 MJ/kg, with the average being

0.68 MJ/kg or 42 per cent (13). The improved

energy efficiency in organic systems is largely

due to lower (or zero) fertiliser and pesticide

inputs, which account for half of the energy

input in conventional potato and winter wheat

production and up to 80 per cent of the energy

consumed in some vegetable crops.

In conventional upland livestock production, the

largest energy input is again indirect in the

form of concentrated and cereal feeds. When

reared organically, a greater proportion of the

feed for dairy cattle, beef and hill sheep is

derived from grass. In the case of milk

production, it has been found that organic

systems are almost five times more energy

efficient on a per animal basis and three and a

half times more energy efficient in terms of unit

output (the energy required to produce a litre of

milk) (13).

...but not when it goes global.

So far so good - but once passed the farm-gate,

things begin to go wrong. Britain imports over

three-quarters of its organic produce, and

despite consumer demand, only two per cent of its

land is organically farmed (14). As the market

has grown it has been met by imports.

A study looking at the energy consumption and

carbon dioxide emissions when importing organic

food products to the UK by plane (15) found that

carbon dioxide emissions range from 1.6 kilograms

to 10.7 kilograms. Air transport of food is the

worst environmental option but road transport,

especially unnecessary journeys, is also bad. For

example 5kg of Sicilian potatoes travelling 2448

miles emits 771 grams of carbon dioxide.

The problem is that, overall, human beings have

developed a tendency to deal with problems on an

ad hoc basis - i.e., to deal with 'problems of

the moment'. This does not foster an attitude of

seeing a problem embedded in the context of

another problem.

Globalisation makes it impossible for modern

societies to collapse in isolation. Any society

in turmoil today, no matter how remote, can cause

problems for prosperous societies on other

continents, and is also subject to their

influence (whether helpful or destabilising).

For the first time in history, we face the risk of a global decline.

Shocks to the system

As already stated, the three main purposes for

which oil is used worldwide are food, transport

and heating. Agriculture is almost entirely

dependent on reliable supplies of oil for

cultivation and for pumping water, and on gas for

its fertilisers; in addition, for every calorie

of energy used by agriculture itself, five more

are used for processing, storage and distribution.

Since farming and the food industry are not

famous for spending money unnecessarily, there

must be a presumption that there is very little

short-term 'slack' which would allow its demand

for energy to be reduced at short notice without

disruptions in food prices. In the case of

transport and heating fuel, there is more scope

for saving energy at short notice; cutting

leisure journeys, for instance, wearing extra

pullovers and, in the slightly longer term,

driving smaller cars have a role to play while,

in the longer term, there is a totally different

low-energy paradigm waiting to be developed. But

it is the short term that has to be survived

first and, in that short term, the competition

for oil for food, transport and heating will be

real and raw.

Through its dependence on oil, contemporary

farming is exposed to the whole question of the

sustainability of our use of fossil fuels. It

took 500 million years to produce these

hydrocarbon deposits and we are using them at a

rate in excess of 1 million times their natural

rate of production. On the time scale of

centuries, we certainly cannot expect to continue

using oil as freely and ubiquitously as we do

today. Something is going to have to change.

The same applies more widely to every natural

resource on which industrial civilisation relies.

Furthermore, one might think that there is a

compounded problem. Not only are there more

people consuming these resources, but their per

capita consumption also increases in line with

the elaboration of technology. We seem to be

facing a problem of diminishing returns, indeed

of running out of the vital raw materials needed

to support our economic growth.

Almost every current human endeavour from

transportation, to manufacturing, to electricity

to plastics, and especially food production is

inextricably intertwined with oil and natural gas

supplies.

Commercial food production is oil powered. Most

pesticides are petroleum- (oil) based, and all

commercial fertilisers are ammonia-based. Ammonia

is produced from natural gas Oil based

agriculture is primarily responsible for the

world's population exploding from 1 billion at

the middle of the 19th century to 6.3 billion at

the turn of the 21st Oil allowed for farming

implements such as tractors, food storage systems

such as refrigerators, and food transport systems

such as trucks As oil production went up, so did

food production. As food production went up, so

did the population. As the population went up,

the demand for food went up, which increased the

demand for oil. Here we go round the Mulberry

bush Oil is also largely responsible for the

advances in medicine that have been made in the

last 150 years. Oil allowed for the mass

production of pharmaceutical drugs, and the

development of health care infrastructure such as

hospitals, ambulances, roads, etc.

We are now at a point where the demand for

food/oil continues to rise, while our ability to

produce it in an affordable fashion is about to

drop.

Within a few years of Peak Oil occurring, the

price of food will skyrocket because the cost of

fertiliser will soar. The cost of storing

(electricity) and transporting (gasoline) the

food that is produced will also soar.

Oil is required for a lot more than just food,

medicine, and transportation. It is also required

for nearly every consumer item, water supply

pumping, sewage disposal, garbage disposal,

street/park maintenance, hospitals and health

systems, police, fire services and national

defence.

Additionally, as you are probably already aware,

wars are often fought over oil.

Bottom line?

If we think we are food secure here in the UK and

other industrialised countries simply because we

have gas in the car, frankly, we are delusional.

Despite the appearance of an endless bounty of

food, it is a fragile bounty, dependent upon the

integrity of the global oil production, refining

and delivery system. That system is entirely

dependent on the thread of technology. Modern,

technology-based agriculture produces both food,

and seeds for next year's food, on a just-in-time

basis. There are precious little reserves of

either food or seeds to sustain any protracted

interruption.

Technology and the incredibly rich tapestry it

has made possible has created a false sense of

security for so many of us. The thread is flawed;

the tapestry is now fragile; famines are

possible. We must take that seriously. . .

Our food supply, and our economic survival as a

whole, depends on the steady availability of

reasonably priced oil. Is oil our Achilles heel?

This means our food supply is:

Vulnerable:

The oil supplies that fuel the food system could

be exhausted by 2040 (19). In many regions oil

production has peaked and most reserves lie in

the Middle East. Food security is also

threatened: for example, even if all UK fruit

production was consumed in the UK, of every 100

fruit products purchased, only 5 will now have

been grown in the UK.

Inefficient:

For every calorie of carrot, flown in from South

Africa, we use 66 calories of fuel. The huge fuel

use in the food system means more carbon dioxide

emissions, which means climate change, which

means more damage to food supplies, as well as