Fossil Food

Energy in Ag Consumption, calories, and emissions

related to our food supplyand the impacts to our regional economy

WSU CSANRACOct. 30, 2007

Tim CrosbyFarm to Cafeteria Director, 21 Acres

www.21acres.orgtimcrosby@comcast.net

206.300.9860

Food System Factoids

• In 2004, the U.S. exported nearly $20 million worth of lettuce while it imported $20 million worth of Mexican lettuce.

• While California-grown brussels sprouts head north to Canada, the state imports them from Belgium and Mexico.

• International strawberry imports to California peak during the state’s strawberry season.

• Half of California’s processed tomato exports go to Canada, which ships $36 million worth of processed tomatoes to the U.S. annually.

• In 2003, New York shipped $1.1 million worth of California almonds to Italy, while importing $1.1 million worth of almonds from Italy.

Sources: Agricultural Marketing Research Center, International Society for Ecology and Culture, and USDA, via Mother Jones.

Energy Consumption

• Total U.S. Energy Use: 100 QBtu (2005) 1

• Food System: 10.25 Quads (2000)2

• Food production and distribution accounts for 10-35% of U.S. energy consumption (2007) 3

– Discrepancy from what is measured.

Sources: 1) Energy Information Administration Annual Energy Overview (2005); 2) Heller and Keoleian "Life Cycle-Based Sustainability Indicators for Assessment of the U.S. Food System” (2000); 3) City of Portland Peak Oil Task Force " Descending the Oil Peak:Navigating the Transition from Oil and Natural Gas” (2007);

Based off producing 3,800 calories of food

Best Science To Date

16% of total energy use in food system 1

Sources: 1) John Hendrickson, “Energy Use in the U.S. Food System: A Summary of Existing Research and Analysis” Sustainable Farming, Vol. 7, No 4, 1997

Calories measure energy

• Today’s average is 10:1– Energy:food– Total food system

• Grain-fed beef 35:11

– Animal protein 20-80:1

• Can of diet soda 2,200:1 – 70% tied up in the aluminum

can.– Can of Classic Coke: c.

2,200:140• Fresh vegetables 2-5:1

(1983)2

Sources: 1) Horrigan, Leo, Robert S. Lawrence, and Polly Walker. "How Sustainable Agriculture Can Address the Environmental and Human Health Harms of Industrial Agriculture”; 2) John Hendrickson, " Energy Use in the U.S. Food System: a summary of existing research and analysis" Center for Integrated Agricultural Systems, UW-Madison

Canned Corn Calories

Source: Martin C. Heller and Gregory A. Keoleian, "Life Cycle-Based Sustainability Indicators for Assessment of the U.S. Food System", Center for Sustainable Systems, U. of Michigan, Report No. CSS00-04, December 6, 2000

Agriculture Emissions

Source: EPA Office of Atmospheric Programs, " The U.S. Inventory of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: Fast Facts", April 2006

• Post-farm CO2e emissions less clear– Clumped in other categories– If tracked, does it become 10% like energy use?

EPA, “ Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2004”, April 2006

Greenhouse Gases

• Carbon Equivalents (CO2e)– Global Warming Potential (Intergovernmental

Panel on Climate Change)

Source: US EPA, "Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2004", April 2006, USEPA #430-R-06-002

Methane and Nitrous Oxide

• Methane– Global Warming Potential

(GWP) rating of 23.– Ag: 28.3% of total US emissions

• 173.4 million metric tons CO2e• 93 % from livestock

management, including anaerobic decomposition of livestock wastes.

• some from crop residue burning and wetland rice cultivation.

• Nitrous Oxide– GWP rating of 310.– Ag: 76.4% of total US emissions

• 279.9 million metric tons CO2e• Mostly from excess nitrogen

fertilizer

WSU Climate Friendly Farming TM

Restore Soil Carbon

CO2

CO2

Reduce GHG Emissions

N2O

CH4

CO2

Replace Fossil Fuels w/ Biomass

CO2

CO2

Farm to Table Emissions

Ag Pro

duct

ion

Trans

portat

ion

Proce

ssin

g

Packa

ging

Food/

Retai

l

Resta

uran

ts

Hom

e us

e

Was

te d

ispos

al

Farm to Table Emissions

Ag Pro

duct

ion

Trans

portat

ion

Proce

ssin

g

Packa

ging

Food/

Retai

l

Resta

uran

ts

Hom

e us

e

Was

te d

ispos

al

Food Emissions

• In one study: packaging makes up approximately a third of the total supply chain emissions.

– The Carbon Trust " Carbon the supply chain: the next step for business”, November 2006

• Another study found the livestock sector generates more greenhouse gas emissions than transportation.

– UN FAO report "Livestock a major threat to environment" November 29, 2006– However, questions have been raised about methodology. Presented here because it is in public arena.

• 25% of Seattle’s solid waste is food.1– Which is then transported 330 miles to Oregon– Email exchange with Mark Musick, SPU Consultant

Ag Pro

duct

ion

Trans

portat

ion

Proce

ssin

g

Packa

ging

Food/

Retai

l

Resta

uran

ts

Hom

e us

e

Was

te d

ispos

al

UK Carbon Trust

• Roughly 2 Million Metric Tonnes CO2 for travel of food

Carbon Market Ready Foods

Carbon Market Ready Foods

UC Davis Food Energy SymposiumSymposium on Energy LCA in Food SystemsOct. 8-10, 2007

Concept: Skyfarming

Source: Lisa Chamberlain, “Skyfarming: Turning Skyscrapers Into Crop Farms”, New York Magazine, http://nymag.com/news/features/30020/index1.html

Considerations Moving Forward

• Carbon market ready foods– What do these look like for Washington residents?

• Impact of emerging carbon market mechanisms on food prices– Price increase likely without government help.– Lowest price/nutritious foods may rise fastest.

• Price incentives– Engage health, insurance, economic development funds to

reduce price impacts and increase benefit of buying local.– Local Multiplier of additional 35-45% 1

• A shift of 20% of our food dollars into locally directed spending would result in a nearly half billion dollar annual income increase in King County alone and double that in the Central Puget Sound region.

Source: 1) Direct conversations with Viki Sonntag, Researcher Director, Sustainable Seattle

Considerations Moving Forward

• Reduce food in solid waste stream– 25% of Seattle’s solid waste is food. – 20% for King County.1

– Reduce cost, transportation CO2, and landfill methane.• .82 metric tons CO2E reduction per ton of food waste. 2

– 199,448 tons food waste = 163,547 tons CO2E

• Eat Healthy Rebate / CHCSA – Madison, WI: Physician’s Plus Insurance and MACSAC– Cascade Harvest Coalition and 21 Acres– Group Health and King County employees

• Align with related issues, timeframes– Security of food supply, obesity/diabetes, health care costs,

biofuels, regional employment, rural livelihood, food justice

Sources: 1) Email exchange with Mark Musick, SPU food consultant; 2) Dana Visse, "Food Waste Diversion Greenhouse Gas Analysis: Portland, Oregon", Portland State University, January 2004

Active State Policy Work: CAT

• Climate Advisory Team– AW-8: Support for an Integrated Regional Food System

• www.ecy.wa.gov/climatechange/cat_twg_agr.htm• RCI-8: Carbon Labeling of Products

• AW-8 Goals:– Quantify potential gains through life cycle assessments of current

and relevant potential food products by Nov. 1, 2009. • Designed around agricultural products optimized for our diverse

growing regions.– Integrate mitigation with cross-sector strategies emerging from

transportation, energy, and residential/commercial/industrial technical working groups by December.

– Increase in-state production, processing, packaging, distribution, demand, and availability of state food for state markets by 2015. Utilize regional food products when appropriate and/or feasible.

– Reduce by 20% by 2020 the transportation distance that individuals, particularly those with limited food choices, have to travel to purchase recommended food such as those included in federal dietary recommendations, partly by encouraging delivery services that minimize physical store trips.

AW-8 Timing• Quantifying research of true potential by Nov. 1, 2009.• State and local public institutions will lead by example by

sourcing local food system products:– 15% voluntary increase in dollars spent for regionally sourced

products by 2010.– 15% required increase in dollars spent for regionally sourced

products by 2015.– 20% required increase in dollars spent for regionally sourced

products by 2020.

AW-8 Implementation Mechanisms

• Determine the true potential for regional food system products and services to reduce ghg emissions, increase clean energy jobs, and reduce fuel imports.

• Port fee incentive for any cargo vessel using bio-based fuels, especially if regionally produced, or that intentionally transports low-carbon food ingredients or products.

• State and local public institutions will lead by example by sourcing local food system products:– 15% voluntary increase in dollars spent for regionally sourced

products by 2010.– 15% required increase in dollars spent for regionally sourced

products by 2015.– 20% required increase in dollars spent for regionally sourced

products by 2020.• Allocate up to fifteen cents per meal served to incorporate

Washington agricultural products in to state agency cafeteria purchases and public school breakfast and lunch programs.

• Encourage co-location of decentralized CHP and renewable energy facilities with food processing, production, and storage hubs.

Active State Policy Work

• Priorities for a Healthy Washington– “Local Farms, Healthy Kids”

• www.environmentalpriorities.org– Collaboration opening between:

• Enviro, Ag, Faith, Health, Business, Government– Draft policy components:

• Expansion of school Fresh Fruits and Vegetables program– Add 75 state funded programs to 25 fed funded programs

• Market study to assist eastern WA develop and deliver in state products to in state markets

– Managed by CSANR• State lead by example in increasing purchase of local

foods– Maybe additional funds for local purchasing

• Align state bid procurement regulations• Create OFM sub category listing to track local

expenditures

UW Study: LCA of Plate of Food

• Regional plate– WA apple, asparagus, potato; Alaska wild salmon

• Global plate– New Zealand apple, Peruvian asparagus, Idaho potato,

Norway farmed salmon

Analysis of UW GHG Food report and potential impacts on WA stateBased off UW report "Seattle Food System Enhancement Project: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study"

http://courses.washington.edu/emksp06/SeattleFoodSystem/Index.shtml

Plate of food: Apple, Asparagus, Potato, Salmon

Total global plate 3,083 grams CO2eTotal regional plate 2,102 grams CO2e

ghg savings/plate 981 grams CO2e

Population WA State 6,400,000 Estimated population WA State20% 1,280,000 Matches target % for regional purchasing in AW-8

GHG reduction 1,255,680,000 g CO2eConversion: 1,000,000 grams per metric ton

1,255.68 Metric Tons CO2e182 Assumed days/year for this plate (half the year)

228,534 Metric Tons CO2eGHG reduction per year 0.23 MMT CO2e

Source: Tim Crosby, Food System Factoids, http://foodsystemfactoids.blogspot.com/

Comparison to other TWGs

• 20%, 1/2 of year = .23 MMT CO2e/yr• 75%, once a week = .24• 50%, 3/4 of year = .86• 3%, every day = .07• 100%, 1 month = .19

• Energy TWG options (2012-2020 numbers)– ES-1 Grid-based renewable energy incentives, barrier removal: 0.9-

3.1 – ES-2 Distributed renewable energy incentives, barrier removal: 0.08-

0.21– ES-3 Efficiency improvements at existing plants: 0.04-1.4

• Transportation TWG options– T-1 Transit, Ridesharing, and Commuter Choice Programs: 1.11 - 4.45– T-3 Transportation Pricing: 0.15 - 1.22– T-7 Diesel Engine Efficiencies: 0.17 - 0.99– T-8 Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure Improvements: 0.12 - 0.21– T-10 Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles: 0.3 - 1.08

Study: Vegan diet vs. Suburban

“ The greenhouse gas emissions of various diets varies by as much as the difference between owning an average sedan versus a Sport Utility Vehicle under typical driving conditions.”

• For personal transportation the average American uses 1.7-6.8 x 107 BTU/yr.

• For food the average American uses roughly 4 x 107 BTU/yr.

– Concerns with study:• uses Pimentel numbers• Don’t think it has been peer reviewed

Source: Gidon Eshel and Pamela Martin, Diet, Energy and Global Warming, Earth Interactions, May 2005, http://geosci.uchicago.edu/~gidon/papers/nutri/nutri3.pdf

Leopold: Consumer Perceptions

Source: Rich Pirog and Andy Larson, “Consumer perceptions of the safety, health, and environmental impact of various scales and geographic origin of food supply chains”, Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture, Iowa State University, September 2007

www.leopold.iastate.edu/pubs/staff/consumer/consumer.htm

“ Are consumers willing to pay more for food from supply chains that emit half as much greenhouse gas as conventional chains? Nearly half of respondents were willing to pay a 10 to 30 percent premium, but a similar percentage was not.”

Potential Research

• Expansion of UW LCA study– “Determine the true potential for regional food system

products and services to reduce ghg emissions, increase clean energy jobs, and reduce fuel imports. Quantify potential gains through life cycle assessments of current and relevant potential food products by Nov. 1, 2009.” (AW-8)

– Plates of food may be easier, faster than individual items– Regional displacement of global food

• How much food do we import? • How does it get here?• What can we grow locally?• Will this reduce carbon footprint?

• Comparison of what we eat vs. what we should eat– LCA of federal dietary guideline foods– What is the carbon footprint differential?

Potential Research

• How much can we actually grow?– Number of farms looking for new markets

• Especially mid-size– Potential Trade Impacts– Local Multiplier work showing potentially strong regional gains

• Impacts on import/export trade less clear– This is not protectionism

• This is support for emerging markets

• How LCA could help improve ag research agenda– “ We are told there are impacts, but what impacts? Food

safety? Economic?”

• Import and Expansion of Euro LCA framework to US– Engage in emerging standardization efforts– Include water