The
Peak Farming issue encompasses population density, ecology and conservation of natural resources and more. This issue tends to fly under our collective radar, but could conceivably be one of the biggest challenges we ever face.
There is a popular misconception in this country that America is the world's breadbasket. The occasional news images of American grain and food aid being delivered to the needy around the world (most recently for the tsunami relief effort) tend to reinforce that idea; how many of us buy into the conceit that "America feeds the world?" I know I did, but no longer. In November 2004, the United States became a Net food importer for the first time in half a century.
Much more below the fold.
There has been debate for decades on the possibility of
peak oil. Essentially, when the extraction and refining process consumes one unit of energy for each unit produced (1 spent = 1 gained), then that energy source has peaked. At that point, it is no longer economically feasible to extract the energy, as there is not enough energy actually produced to justify the extraction.
The often overlooked corollary to this is Peak Farming. I came across a study from 1994 which paints an unsettling picture, particularly as it doesn't take into account the recent boom in Indian and Chinese industrialization and their resultant energy thirst. Naturally, the current political turmoil and instability in Iraq's oil infrastructure caused by the unprovoked 2003 US invasion and ongoing occupation is not addressed either.
The article begins with a summary, then proceeds into a breakdown. The entire thing is scary but well worth reading as it touches on virtually every aspect of the problem from energy to population growth to water supplies to agricultural markets.
FOOD, LAND, POPULATION and the U.S. ECONOMY
by
David Pimentel of Cornell University and
Mario Giampietro
Istituto of Nazionale della Nutrizione, Rome
Executive Summary Released November 21, 1994
For copies of the full report contact:
Carrying Capacity Network
2000 P Street, N.W., Suite 240
Washington, D.C. 20036
(202) 296-4548
[...]
Given current depletion rates of land, water, and energy resources,
U.S. agricultural productivity is already unsustainable. Should the U.S. population double within the next 60 years, the subsequent decrease in arable land will substantially change American eating habits and dramatically reduce future food exports. If Americans want continued access to abundant and affordable food with the ability to continue exporting food, we must work together to stop U.S. population growth and conserve our country's limited land, water, and energy resources in order to achieve a sustainable American future.
[...]
Not only does population expansion reduce available cropland per capita, but on going
soil erosion and expanding urbanization continually result in the slow but continuous loss of cropland. Annually, more than 2 million acres of prime cropland are lost to erosion, salinization, and waterlogging. In addition, more than I million acres are lost from cultivation as urbanization, transportation networks and industries take over croplands.
[...]
In the United States, surface water supplies about 60% of the water used in irrigation, with the remainder coming from ground water supplies. Ground water is referred to as fossil water because it accumulates in aquifers deep below the surface and once removed is replenished only very slowly. That is, less than 0.1% of the stored ground water mined annually by pumping is replaced by rainfall.
The overdraft of U.S. ground water averages 25% greater than its rate of replacement. But in some locations, like the vast U.S. Ogallala aquifer, which stores water for Nebraska, Oklahoma, and Texas, the annual overdraft is 130% to 160% above its replacement rate. If this is allowed to continue, the Ogallala will probably become non-productive within the next 40 years. Thus, the Ogallala and all ground water resources must be carefully managed to prevent their overdraft and subsequent depletion.
[...]
Fossil energy use in all U.S. economic sectors has increased from 20 to as much as 1000-fold in just 4 decades. U.S. citizens consume 20 to 30 times more fossil energy per capita than most people in developing countries.
Since 1945, energy for agricultural use has increased about 4-fold while crop yields have increased about 3-fold. Currently the 400 gallons of oil equivalents expended to feed each American amount to about 17% of all energy used in this country each year.
[...]
Over the next 60 years both erosion and urbanization will diminish our arable land base of 470 million acres. Currently 2 million acres per year are lost from production because of erosion, salinization, and waterlogging. Based on this rate of loss,
120 million acres are projected to be lost during the next 60 years. No doubt some of this unproductive land will be replaced, but most probably with marginal land, the type that requires substantial fossil-fuel inputs of fertilizers, pesticides, and irrigation to maintain crop productivity.
Often overlooked is the continuous impact of urbanization and transportation systems on arable land resources. Over the past 200 years, for instance, the expansion of these systems has covered 260 million acres, approximately half of which was arable land. Thus, about 1 acre of land has been used for urbanization and highways by each person added to the U.S. population.
[...]
Americans currently use about 1,450 gallons/day/capita (g/d/c) for all their needs, with the largest amount expended in agriculture. If water management is substantially improved, the projected 520 million Americans will have about 700 g/d/c in 2050 (Table l). Hydrologists consider 700 g/d/c minimal for human needs, including water for adequate food production. Clearly Americans will have to make major adjustments in their water use, especially in the arid regions of the nation. (More...)
According to these figures, roughly 25% of our farmland will be unusable by 2045. Raising domesticated meat animals uses a great deal of land, and they consume a lot of feed grain. Taken overall, this peak farming issue may be a hidden factor (in addition to Americans being lamentably fat) in the promulgation of the newly veggie-dense HHS/USDA dietary guidelines.
Since the article itself is 11 years old, I had a few questions so I decided to write one of the authors and follow up. Dr. David Pimentel is a Ph.D entomology research professor at Cornell university, and here's a very short sampling from his CV (which goes back to 1951):
- Pimentel, D., G. Rodrigues, T. Wang, R. Abrams, K. Goldberg, H. Staecker, E. Ma, L. Brueckner, L. Trovato, C. Chow, U. Govindarajulu & S. Boerke. 1994. Renewable energy: Economic and Environmental Issues. BioScience 44 (8): 536-547.
- Pimentel, D., R. Harman, M. Pacenza, J. Pecarsky, and M. Pimentel. 1994. Natural resources and an optimum human population. Population and Environment 15 (5): 347-369.
- 1976-present Professor of Insect Ecology & Agricultural Sciences, Dept. of Entomology and Section of Ecology and Systematics, Cornell University
- Consulting Ecologist on White House Staff, 1969-1970
- 1963-69 Professor and Head of Dept. of Entomology and Limnology, Cornell University
- 1961- O.E.E.C. Fellow, Oxford University, England 1961 - NSF Computer Scholar, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts
Suffice it to say that the man is an expert. I received his responses to my questions today (I took the liberty of adding a couple of links for clarity):
Q: The current conventional wisdom is that the price of oil will never again fall below current levels due to increased competition for supply by India, China and other rapidly-developing industrial economies of the world. Considering the increasing ratio of energy use to agricultural output you cited, what would you say are the prospects for American agricultural unsustainability at this point? Do you still consider your projections of a decade ago to be accurate, or would you revise your dates nearer based on recent trends?
A: U.S. agricultural sustainability is suffering because of rapid population growth in the nation. We are adding 3.3 million to our population each year. Each person added to the population requires 1 acre of land for urbanization and highways. In California, a recent report indicates that more than 300,000 acres of agricultural land was lost due to development in one year.
Q: Considering the domestication side of agriculture, many of our "meat factories" (for lack of a more elegant term) are large agri-businesses focused almost exclusively on profitability. In some cases, this focus is at the expense of public health and pollution control best practices. Some level of pollution is of course unavoidable and to be expected from such facilities, but by nature's example, creatures tend to be reluctant to foul their own nests. Industry-wide, is the overall pollution level increasing to such a degree that they are degrading their own future viability? If so, is the degradation reversible?
A: Pollution from livestock production appears to be increasing. A recent National Academy of Sciences report indicates that 76 million people in the U.S. each years suffer from foodborne infections. Many of these infections are related to livestock production in the U.S.
Q: I live in Ohio, a state with a major agricultural basis to its economy. In the past 5-10 years, I have seen huge swaths of still-productive Ohio farmland being developed into so-called "exurban" residential areas. This trend shows no sign of decelerating; it in fact seems to be picking up speed with each passing year. How much of a threat (if any) to American "food security" does this loss of farmland to development represent?
A: You are correct, Ohio is losing agricultural land rapidly to development.
Q: The massive baby-boom generation is entering retirement. If I have interpreted census data correctly, subsequent generations have been smaller, and even with modern medical advances the "boomers" certainly won't live forever. Does this make any difference to your assessment of population stresses on American agriculture? Wouldn't growing immigration simply replace the loss, rather than create an additional demographic burden?
A: High immigration rates contribute about 70% of the growth in the U.S. population each year.
In the original article, Dr. Pimentel states that over 3 million acres of agricultural land are lost annually, and roughly 66% of that is due to erosion and other consequences of modern agriculture. If each person's average "Ecological Footprint" in the US is 24 acres per person, the math doesn't look good.
Sorry for the long-winded crosspost.