Sustainable Agriculture: The Unrecognized Key to Reversing Climate Change

By Debbie Barker and Andrew Kimbrell

Published in the Huffington Post
November 5, 2009 06:09 PM

World leaders who met last month at the United Nations climate summit took stock of the sobering reality that a global pact on climate change very likely will not be achieved in Copenhagen this December. At the heart of this looming failure is money. Most of the proposed solutions to curb greenhouse gas emissions are costly, and funds are scarce. However, there is a solution being overlooked in climate negotiations that could result in rapid greenhouse gas reductions with comparatively low financial investment and little technology transfer — a transition toward ecological, organic agriculture.

Even though research concludes that industrial agriculture is one of the major contributors to global warming, neither international nor U.S. domestic policies are adequately addressing this sector. The figures are stunning — at least 60 percent of all nitrous oxide (NO2) emissions, the most potent greenhouse gas, are caused by industrial agriculture, primarily from the use of synthetic nitrogen fertilizer. Nearly 40 percent of methane (CH4), the second strongest greenhouse gas, is due to industrial farming practices, much of this from intensive industrialized livestock operations.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) conservatively tells us that industrial agriculture methods contribute at least 14 percent of greenhouse gas emissions. Many scientists say this figure could as high as 25-30 percent of emissions when the total energy backpack of the current food system is taken into account. Some greenhouse emissions related to agriculture are embedded in other sectors cited by the IPCC — forestry, transportation, and industry. These areas include inputs such as the use of fossil fuels to produce chemical fertilizers and pesticides; processing, packaging, refrigeration, and transport of food; and land conversion from biodiverse ecosystems to giant, monoculture food plantations.

Given that industrial agriculture methods are a major part of the global warming problem, why not turn agriculture around to make it a major climate solution? As the late Edward R. Goldsmith — author of seminal writings about ecosystems, including the critical link between agriculture and climate change — often stated: “When doing something that causes harm, one must do the exact opposite in order for things to change.” If we make a U-turn away from harmful industrial agriculture practices toward ecological, organic systems, we can significantly change the course of climate change.

The potential is exciting. A Rodale Institute study projects that the planet’s 3.5 billion tillable acres could sequester nearly 40 percent of current CO2 emissions if they were converted to “regenerative” organic agriculture practices. The same 10-year study submits that if U.S. cropland (based on 434 million acres) were converted to organic farming methods, we could reduce nearly 25 percent of our total GHG emissions.

Many studies have drawn similar conclusions. In India, organic farming research shows increases in carbon absorption by up to 55 percent (even higher when agro-forestry is added into the mix), and water holding capacity is increased by 10 percent. A study of 20 commercial farms in California found that organic fields had 28 percent more carbon in the soil than industrial farms.

The inevitable industrial critique of organic farming is: yes, that’s all well and good, but can we afford to worry about environmental hazards when we must feed our burgeoning global population? Viewing the current problem more broadly answers pro-industrial arguments decisively.

The environmental problem of climate change that industrial agriculture is now causing will guarantee that we simply won’t be able to feed a hungry world. And, contrary to general belief and prejudice fostered by agribusiness, industrial crops do not consistently yield more food. In fact, it is a pernicious myth that ecological organic agriculture yields less than conventional agriculture. A comprehensive study of 293 crop comparisons of industrial and organic agriculture demonstrated that organic farm yields are roughly comparable to industrial farm yields in developed countries; and result in much higher yields in developing nations.

The World Bank and United Nations International Assessment on Knowledge, Science and Technology concluded that fundamental overhaul of the current food and farming system is needed to get us out of the food (and fuel) crisis, and that small-scale farmers and agro-ecological methods are the way toward food security. Further, numerous studies unequivocally state that our survival depends on the resiliency and biodiversity of organic farm systems free of fossil fuels and chemical dependency.

Recently, Senators Kerry and Boxer introduced a version of a climate and energy bill which finally includes language that begins to address harmful emissions caused by current agricultural practices. This is a good step, but we need large-scale change in the way we grow our food. The way forward, the great U turn, is to transition toward regenerative, living carbon systems and away from non-renewable, dead fossil-carbon systems. A rapid, global transition is an imperative both for mitigating climate change and for ensuring food security.

Debbie Barker is international program director, of the Washington, D.C. based not-for-profit Center for Food Safety.

——————————————————————————————

Don’t eat the hype

Ecological farms: the only real way to feed an increasingly hungry world

Published by Grist.org and available online here
Nov 20, 2009
by Debbie Barker

There are those who would like us to believe that industrialized farming is the only way to feed the earth’s growing population. Disinformation comes daily from powerful industrial agricultural companies whose profits depend entirely on the sale of chemicals, genetically modified (GM) seeds, and food processing. Furthermore, they maintain that massive-scale farming methods are key to adapting to climate change.

This is just not so.

Contrary to what the propaganda tells us, yields from industrial crops do not consistently produce more food.  It’s an industry-generated myth that ecologically-safe organic agriculture yields less than conventional agriculture. In fact, a comprehensive study comparing 293 crops from industrial and organic growers demonstrates that organic farm yields are roughly comparable to industrial farms in developed countries; and result in much higher yields in the developing world.

Numerous studies unequivocally state that our survival depends on resilient and biodiverse farm systems that are free of fossil fuel and chemical dependencies.  The 2008 World Bank and United Nations International Assessment on Knowledge, Science and Technology concluded that a fundamental overhaul of the current food and farming system is needed to get us out of both the food and fuel crises. The report’s findings indicated that small-scale farmers and agro-ecological methods are the way forward.

This assessment dovetails with a 2002 United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) report, which found that organic farming enables ecosystems to better adjust to the effects of climate change and has major potential for reducing agricultural GHG emissions. The FAO report also found that organic agriculture performs better than conventional agriculture in terms of both direct energy consumption (fuel and oil) and indirect consumption (synthetic fertilizers and pesticides).

Large-scale agriculture-dependent upon commercial seeds (including GM seeds), chemical sprays, and petroleum-based fertilizers-can only reliably feed one thing: company profits. These profits come at the expense of our climate as well as farmers who become wholly dependent upon these companies for their livelihood.

And it’s farmers who are realizing through hard experience that this system doesn’t work.  Monsanto, a major proponent of GM seeds, agro-chemicals and industrialized methods, this week reports a massive $283 billion loss in the third quarter-quite a hit.

Monsanto and others in the industry are scrambling for a foothold in developing nations to save a failed agricultural and business model in the U.S.  They’re trying to convince foundations, aid agencies, and foreign governments that they hold the only key to staving off starvation.  And, the way to do this is by smearing organic farming – which is the only truly dependable way to feed the world – and by ignoring climate change.

They’re putting their shareholders’ bottom line before a sick and hungry planet.  It’s time we held them to the truth.

———————————————————————————————

CENTER FOR FOOD SAFETY URGES CONGRESS TO ADDRESS IMPACTS OF AGRICULTURE IN CLIMATE CHANGE BILL

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE – October 13, 2009

Contact: Debi Barker, Director of the Center for Food Safety’s Climate Change and Agriculture Program.  -  202-547-9359, ext. 12. Website: www.coolfoodscountdown.org

Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) released a version of a climate and energy bill, called the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act, which calls for higher greenhouse gas emission reductions than the Congressional bill passed last July. One notable difference in this new draft version is the inclusion of language that begins to address harmful emissions caused by current agricultural practices.

While The Center for Food Safety applauds this development and the fact that global warming is finally being seriously addressed in Congress, the organization laments that the draft version still does not sufficiently address the significant impact agriculture has on climate change, and the significant potential it could have in reversing current destructive climatic trends.

“Though research unequivocally concludes that industrial agriculture is one of the major contributors to global warming, neither international nor domestic policies adequately take on this issue,” said Debi Barker, Director of the Center for Food Safety’s Climate Change and Agriculture Program.” Barker notes that at least 60 percent of all dangerous nitrous oxide (NO2) emissions and 40 percent of all methane (CH4) emissions are produced by industrial farming, primarily from the use of synthetic nitrogen fertilizer and intensive livestock operations respectively.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, an international consultative body, reports conservatively that industrial agriculture accounts for at least 14 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions. Many scientists maintain that this number is even higher, falling in the 25 to 30 percent range when the total energy backpack of the current food system is taken into account.

“The environmental goals of climate legislation cannot be compromised, but without addressing the impacts of industrial agriculture practices on climate, that is exactly what’s taking place,” added Andrew Kimbrell, Founder and Executive Director of CFS. ” If the United States is serious about creating real environmental change, this piece of legislation must recognize the impacts of industrial agriculture on climate and take steps to reverse trends by requiring a shift to low-impact, sustainable agriculture.”

A Rodale Institute study projected that the planet’s 3.5 billion tillable acres could sequester nearly 40 percent of current CO2 emission if they were converted to “Regenerative” organic agriculture practices. The same ten-year study submits that if U.S. cropland were converted to organic farming methods, we could reduce nearly 25 percent of the nation’s total greenhouse gas emissions.

“We applaud the inclusion of agriculture in this draft bill, but we urge lawmakers to take further decisive steps to stop practices that produce harmful emissions,” Barker concluded. “If we make a U-turn away from harmful industrial agriculture practices toward ecological, organic systems, we could quickly and significantly alter the course of climate change.”

The Center for Food Safety is a national, non-profit, membership organization founded in 1997 to protect human health and the environment by curbing the use of harmful food production technologies and by promoting organic and other forms of sustainable agriculture. CFS currently represents over 85,000 members across the nation. On the web at: http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org