Professional Documents
Culture Documents
by
"The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of UNCTAD"
Sustainable Agriculture & Green Energy Economy
Food and energy security look increasing precarious with dwindling oil and water reserves, and
global warming set to slash agricultural productivity; all we need to exit the crisis is a decisive shift
to sustainable agriculture and the green energy economy
Dr. Mae-Wan Ho
2
Fuel versus food
Biofuels from crops not only jeopardize food production; they are highly unsustainable, requiring
huge inputs of fertilizers and pesticides as well as water, depleting soil fertility, accelerating soil
erosion and generating a great deal of polluting wastes. A realistic energy accounting shows that all
biofuels except one require more energy input in fossil fuels than the energy in the biofuel product.
In other words, they have net negative energy returns and hence result in more CO2 emissions than
just using the fossil fuels [15]. The energy returns for the major biofuels are: corn ethanol -46
percent, switchgrass -68 percent; soybean biodiesel -63 percent; and rapeseed -58 percent. Even
palm oil produced in Thailand has a -8 percent net energy return. The only exception is ethanol
from sugarcane in Brazil, with a positive energy return of 128 percent [20], though it is still
unsustainable in other respects.
3
independence from obsolete, wasteful, centralised power plants. Germany has shown us how to
implement decentralised distributed renewable energies rapidly in the past five years, and its
renewable energy industry says it is on course to become 100 percent renewable by 2050.
Renewable energy is inexhaustible energy that does not run out. It is free once you’ve
installed the equipment to capture it, and companies can’t meter it or cut you off. Most importantly,
it is available to all, so no need to fight over it!
Green energies are not just renewable; they must be environmentally friendly, healthy, safe,
non-polluting and sustainable. That rules out nuclear, carbon capture and storage, biofuels, and its
latest incarnation biochar [29]. Biochar is worse because green plants not only fix carbon dioxide in
biomass, they also generate oxygen that aerobic organisms like us need. Climatologists have found
[30] O2 Dropping Faster than CO2 Rising (SiS 44). Turning vast quantities of plant biomass into
charcoal for burial in hundreds of millions of hectares of ‘spare land’, as proposed in the
International Biochar Initiative is the surest way to deplete atmospheric oxygen and precipitate
mass species extinction. And humans would be the first to go.
This brings me to how ‘sustainable’ should be defined. It is to endure for hundreds or
thousands of years like natural ecosystems, thanks to a natural circular economy of reciprocity and
cooperation that renews and regenerates the whole (more later). For human beings, it is to use
natural resources responsibly and equitably, to meet the needs of all in the present without
compromising the needs of future generations.
The world’s potential of green energies is truly enormous. Wind power has the potential to
supply the world’s electricity needs 40 times or 5 times all its energy needs. Solar panels at a
modest 10 percent efficiency covering 0.1 percent of the world’s land surface could provide all our
energy needs. Methane from anaerobic digestion of organic wastes can save over 50 percent of our
energy consumption in combination with local organic food production. And there are many further
possibilities, according to local resources: microhydroelectric, geothermal, tidal reef, deep water
air-conditioning (but not on large scale), saline agriculture, and more.
A recent assessment of global potential for renewable energies by the German government
[31] (see Table 1) shows that the total potential for solar, wind, small hydro, ocean (including tidal,
wave, and deep water), and geothermal is 11 942 EJ, more than 20 times the current energy
consumption. The largest electricity generation potential are the solar technologies concentrating
solar thermal power plants (CSP) and photovoltaics (PV), followed by wind onshore and ocean
energy. The potential for CSP and PV electricity generation is particularly large in Africa. Wind
onshore potentials are high in North America, while Latin America has abundant biomass
resources.
4
Our enquiry into green energies [28] concludes that the world can be 100 percent renewable
by 2050.
• A variety of truly green and affordable options already exist, and more innovations are on
the way.
• Policies that promote innovations and stimulate internal market for decentralised, distributed
generation are key
• Global cooperation is crucial; developed nations have an international obligation to support
developing nations to fight global warming with renewable energies, including free
technology transfer.
5
More income for farmers
The same Iowa State University experiment demonstrated that on average, the organic crops return
twice as much earnings over the four years, largely due to savings on chemical fertilizers and
pesticides. There is plenty of evidence that organic farmers earn more than conventional farmers all
over the world [27].
More resistance and resilience
An important advantage of organic cropping systems is that they are more resistant to physical
stresses such as floods and droughts, and biological stresses such as pests and diseases. Also, they
are more resilient, in that they recover faster from stresses. These qualities make them perfect for
adapting to climate change and improving food security.
A study carried out in Nicaragua after Hurricane Mitch found that organic, agro-ecologically
managed farms were more resistant to damage. They had more topsoil, more vegetation, less
erosion and lower economic losses compared to plots on conventional farms. A long-term field trial
at Rodale Institute in Kutztown, Pennsylvania involving 6.1 ha compared three different cropping
systems: conventional, animal manure and legume-based organic, and legume-based organic. The
results over 13 years showed that organic yields were not different from conventional, except in
drought years, when organic yields were 28 to 34 percent higher than conventional. Organic soils
had superior water-holding capacity, and water percolating through into the soil was 15 to 20
percent greater in organic soils.
Saves energy
It is estimated that a third or more of all energy used in US agriculture goes to commercial fertilizer
and pesticide production, the most energy intensive of all farm inputs. Approximately 80 MJ of
fossil fuel energy is spent in making and transporting 1 kg of fertilizer N. China used 32.6 Mt
fertilizer N in 2007, amounting to 2.61 EJ of energy (3.6 percent of national energy consumption of
72.2 EJ in 2006), or 57.9 Mt of oil (14.6 percent of national oil consumption). I have not included
the energy costs of pesticides, which could be 10 to 20 percent that of N fertilizers.
Saves the climate
Phasing out N fertilizers saves an equivalent of 57.9 Mt of oil that emits 179.5 Mt CO2 (2.38
percent national emissions). Moreover, using organic as opposed to chemical fertilizers reduced
N2O emissions by 22 percent in a rice-duck system in south China. China’s N2O constituted 8
percent of its 7.527 Gt national greenhouse gas emissions in 2005, of which 70 percent is
attributable to agriculture. A 22 percent reduction in N2O on switching from chemical to organic
fertilizer would save 1.23 percent of national greenhouse emissions, i.e., 92.7 Mt CO2e. So phasing
out N fertilizers would result in a total saving of 272.2 Mt CO2e (3.62 percent national emissions).
The major saving is in organic soils, whcih sequester a lot of carbon. A long term study at
the Rodale Institute in Kutztown, Pennsylvania, USA, found that organic soils sequester on average
4.114 tonnes of CO2/ha/y, while soils in conventionally managed crops did not increase in carbon
content. China has 166 million ha of crop lands in 2007. If all the croplands were converted to
organic, the amount of carbon sequestered would be 682.9 Mt of CO2, or 9.07 percent of national
emissions. Thus, a total of 917.9 Mt CO2 would be mitigated each year, representing 12.19 percent
of national emissions.
Anaerobic digestion
China has been supporting anaerobic digestion for industry and households since 2003. However,
its use on farms is still limited. It is estimated that livestock wastes from agriculture emit
6
greenhouse gases, especially CH4, amounting to 800 Mt a year, and about 400 Mt CO2e could be
mitigated if the livestock wastes were anaerobically digested. At the same time, it would yield 13.9
Mt, or 0.774EJ of methane fuel, and mitigating 53.5 Mt CO2e in substituting for fossil fuels.
Anaerobic digestion could include human manure (traditionally used as crop fertilizer in
China). Agriculture is estimated to employ 40.8 percent of the population. Anaerobic digestion of
the manure from 40.8 percent of 1.4 billion would yield 2.0168 Mt methane or 0.112 EJ energy..
In addition, China has an estimated unused primary agricultural and forestry residues (in dry
mass) of 263.285 Mt/y and secondary agricultural and forestry residues of 47.889 Mt/y. Plant
biomass has a higher yield of methane, up to 0.266 kg per kg total solid, and therefore has the
potential to generate a total of 82.756 Mt methane providing 4.6 EJ energy.
The advantages of anaerobic digestion are well-known (see Box 1 [33]). The enormous
energy potential from wastes in the form of methane, coupled with its overriding environmental and
agronomic benefits stand in stark contrast to the many harmful consequences of producing biofuels
from energy crops, first or second generation.
Box 1
Advantages of anaerobic digestion of organic wastes
• Produces an abundant, readily available source of bioenergy that does not take land away from
growing food
• Takes a wide range of feedstock, including livestock and human manure, crop and food
residues, paper, bakery and brewery wastes, slaughterhouse wastes, garden trimmings, etc, and
the yields of methane generally better in mixed waste streams
• Biogas methane is a clean cooking fuel, especially compared to firewood (and dung)
• Methane can be used as fuel for mobile vehicles or for combined heat and power generation
Methane-driven cars are currently the cleanest vehicles on the road by far
• Biogas methane is a renewable and carbon mitigating fuel (more than carbon neutral); it saves
on carbon emission twice over, by preventing the escape of methane and nitrous oxide into the
atmosphere and by substituting for fossil fuel
• Conserves plant nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorous for soil productivity
• Produces a superb fertilizer for crops as by-product
• Prevents pollution of ground water, soil, and air
• Improves food and farm hygiene, removing 90 percent or more of harmful chemicals and
bacteria
• Recycles wastes efficiently into food and energy resources for the circular economy
A combination of organic agriculture and anaerobic digestion in China has the potential to
mitigate at least 23 percent of national greenhouse gas emissions and save 11.3 percent of energy
consumption (see Table 3). In other words, sustainable agriculture with anaerobic digestion saves
more than the agricultural sectors’ emissions and energy use, thus already contributing to other
sectors of the green economy.
7
Table 3 Green potential of organic agriculture and anaerobic digestion
Implementing the circular economy with green energies and sustainable agriculture
Anaerobic digestion is the very embodiment of circular economy. It recycles wastes efficiently into
food and energy resources.
The role of anaerobic digestion in the circular economy is most clearly seen in the Dream
Farm concept [33] that I have formalized from the work of waste-management engineer George
Chan. It is an abundantly productive farm with diverse crops, livestock and fish ponds, built around
anaerobic digestion of livestock and other organic wastes. George Chan, in turn, learned about this
circular economy from the Chinese peasants who perfected the dyke-pond system of Pearl River
Delta [34]. The Chinese peasants, like many traditional indigenous farmers, know that nature runs
on the circular economy, which is why it is sustainable. There are many dyke-pond systems. In one
version, pigs, elephant grass, mulberry and silkworms are raised on the dykes, the wastes and
elephant grass go to feed up to 5 species of carp in the ponds. The pond water is used to ‘fertigate’
the crops on the dykes, and pond mud used as additional fertilizer. The system was so productive
that it supported 17 people per ha in its heyday. This is the kind of productivity that China needs for
its limited land.
I have proposed a Dream Farm 2 [32] (see Fig. 1) which, in addition to anaerobic digestion,
explicitly incorporates green energies at small to micro-scale (and include permanent pastures and
woodlands). This mix of energies not only ensures a reliable supply, but can reduce energy use by
at least 30 percent through exploiting ‘waste’ heat from power generation, and preventing energy
loss in long distance distribution and transmission.
8
Figure 1 Dream Farm 2
The diagram is colour-coded. Pink is for energy, green for agricultural produce, blue is for
water conservation and flood control, black is waste in the ordinary sense of the word, which soon
gets converted into food and energy resources. Purple is for education and research into new
science and technologies. The advantages of Dream Farm 2 are presented in Box 2.
Box 2
The advantages of Dream Farm 2:
• Thermodynamically optimized for efficient use of resources and productivity
• Energy use at the point of production improves efficiency by up to 60 percent
• Runs entirely on renewable energies without fossil fuels, hence saving up to 100 percent of
carbon emissions
• Increases sequestration of carbon in soil and in standing biomass
• Reduces wastes and environmental pollution to a minimum
• Conserves and purifies water and controls flooding
• Produces a diversity of crops, livestock and fish in abundance
• Fresh and nutritious food free from agrochemicals produced and consumed locally for
maximum health benefits
9
• Provides employment opportuni8ties for the local community
• Demonstrates circular zero-entropy economy at work
• Assembles in one showcase all the relevant technologies that can deliver sustainable food and
energy and a profitable zero-carbon green economy
• Provides an incubator for new energy and food technologies
• Provides hands-on education and research opportunities at all levels from infants to university
students and beyond
• Promotes similar farms all over the world
Approximately 57 percent of China’s carbon emissions come from the energy sector,
according to the energy mix given by the International Energy Agency [35]. An efficiency saving of
30 percent would mean a reduction of 17.1 percent in carbon emissions. The green potential of
Dream Farm 2 is given in Table 4. As can be seen, Dream Farm 2, if generally adopted in China,
would mitigate 40 percent of greenhouse emissions, and save 41 percent of energy consumption,
only counting anaerobic digestion. So, with the addition of solar, wind or microhydroelectric as
appropriate, such farms can compensate in the best case scenario for the carbon emissions and
energy consumption of the entire nation. The key to the success of Dream Farm 2 is local
production and local consumption for both food and energy.
I am pleased to see that UNCTAD (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development)
has come to the same conclusion quite independently, in its latest Trade and Environment Review
(TER) [36]. It proposes that developing nations can effectively leapfrog (my word) to low carbon
economies by improving energy efficiency, adopting organic agriculture, and installing affordable
off-grid renewable energies. There is certainly much scope for energy efficiency that is almost
immediately profitable in savings on energy and maintenance, in building technologies as stressed
in the TER, and also other simple technologies mentioned in my report on the TER [37], such as
variable speed motors and LED (light emission diodes) lighting..
10
Figure 2 From linear to circular economy
In the ideal, the organism’s circular economy satisfies the zero-entropy condition (Fig. 3) -
entropy being made up of dissipated or waste energy..
The zero-entropy ideal depends on coupled cycles of activities at every scale, activities that
generate energy are directly linked to those requiring energy; thereby minimising the dissipation of
energy and materials, and even the wastes exported to the environment is minimum, which makes
sense, as the organism depends on the environment for input. Sustainable ecological and
11
agroecological systems work precisely in the same way (Fig. 4). Lots of life cycles are coupled
together, and the ‘wastes’ of one organism is nutrient for another.
The circular green economy is built on reciprocity and cooperation, and balanced growth at
every stage. As you can see, more lifecycles can be added into the system to make it bigger,
provided these lifecycles are linked by reciprocity and cooperation. It is intuitive to see the different
lifecycles as biodiversity; the more biodiversity, the more productive the system, which amounts to
sustainable development, or balanced growth at every stage.
The green economy (Figure 5, left) contrasts strongly with the dominant brown economy.
The brown economy is based on infinite growth fuelled by maximum dissipation and exploitation
of people and planet. It doesn’t close the circle to build up structure or dynamic cycles. Boom and
bust are inherent to the brown economy, so financial collapse is nothing new. More seriously, it has
destroyed the earth’s habitats and brought us climate change.
The green economy closes circles and builds balanced dynamic structures that sustain the
whole, and enable us to thrive in balance with the earth. We must not hesitate to choose the green
economy now.
12
Figure 5 The green versus the brown economy
References
1. “World food aid at 20-year low, 1 billion hungry-WFP”, Reuters, 16 September 2009,
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSLF132356
2. “The global food crisis. More than one billion people affected by world food shortages”,
Angela Higbee, suite101.com, 9 November 2009, http://world-
hunger.suite101.com/article.cfm/the_global_food_crisis_part_1
3. “2010 food crisis for dummies” Eric deCarbonnet, Market Skeptics, 17 December 2009,
http://www.marketskeptics.com/2009/12/2010-food-crisis-for-dummies.html
4. Ho MW. Why we need organic sustainable food systems now. In I Ho MW, Burcher S, Lim
LC, et al. Food Futures Now, Organic, Sustainable, Fossil Fuel Free, ISIS/TWN,
London/Penang, 2008, http://www.i-sis.org.uk/foodFutures.php
5. “Experts: global food shortages could ‘continue for decades’” Joseph Dancy, The Market
Oracle, 22 February 2008, http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article3782.html
6. Ho MW and Cummins J. Mystery of disappearing honeybees. Science in Society 34, 35-36,
2007.
7. Ho MW. Oil running out? Science in Society 25, 50-51, 2005.
8. Darley J. High Noon for Natural Gas, Chelsea Green Publishing Company, Vermont, 2004.
9. Peng S, Huang J, Sheehy JE, LazAa RC, Visperas RM, Zhong X, Centeno GS, Khush GS
and Cassman KG, Rice yields decline with higher night temperatures from global warming.
PNAS 2004, 101, 9971-5.
10. “Warmer planet, fewer crops? Ezra Klein, The Washington Post, 14 October 2009,
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
dyn/content/article/2009/10/13/AR2009101300419.html
11. Ho MW. Europe unveils 2020 plan for reducing C emissions. Science in Society 37
12. Ho MW. Biofuels for oil addicts. Science in Society 30
13
13. Most of the petroleum we use is imported. U.S. Energy Information Administration,
Independent Statistics and Analysis, 23 February 2010,
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/energyexplained/index.cfm?page=oil_imports
14. Pimentel D. Corn ethanol as energy. The case against US production subsidies. International
Harvard Review Agriculture 31, Summer 2009,
http://hir.harvard.edu/index.php?page=article&id=1911
15. Pimentel D, Marklein A, Toth MA, Karpoff MN and Paul GS. Food versus biofuels:
environmental and economic costs. Hum Ecol 2009, 37, 1-12
16. Ho MW. Biofuels = biodevastation, hunger and false carbon credits. In Ho MW, Burcher S,
Lim LC, et al. Food Futures Now, Organic, Sustainable, Fossil Fuel Free, ISIS/TWN,
London/Penang, 2008, http://www.i-sis.org.uk/foodFutures.php
17. Ho MW. Food without fossil fuels now. Science in Society 39, 7-13, 2008.
18. “How food and water are driving a 21st century African land grab”, John Vidal, the
Guardian.co.uk, 7 March 2010, http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/mar/07/food-
water-africa-land-grab
19. “Using Pakistan’s land to grow food for the Saudis”, Nirupama Subrmanian, Alaiwah! 5
October 2009, http://alaiwah.wordpress.com/2009/10/05/using-pakistans-land-to-grow-
food-for-the-saudis/
20. Pimentel, D., and Patzek, T. W. (2007). Ethanol Production: Energy and Economic Issues
Related to U.S. and Brazilian Sugarcane. Natural Resources Research 16: 235–242.
21. The International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for
Development, Island Press, 2010, http://www.islandpress.org/iaastd
22. Ho MW. “GM-free organic agriculture to feed the world”. Science in Society 38, 14-15,
2008.
23. Ho MW and Lim LC. The Case for a GM-Free Sustainable World, Independent Science
Panel Report, Institute of Science in Society and Third World Network, London and
Penang, 2003; republished GM-Free, Exposing the Hazards of Biotechnology to Ensure the
Integrity of Our Food Supply, Vitalhealth Publishing, Ridgefield, Ct., 2004 (both available
from ISIS online bookstore http://www.i-sis.org.uk/onlinestore/books.php#1)
24. GM Science Exposed: Hazards Ignored, Fraud, Regulatory Sham and Violation of Farmers’
Rights, ISIS CD book, 2008. http://www.i-sis.org.uk/GM_Science_Exposed.php
25. Ho MW. Genetic Engineering Dream of Nightmare? The Brave New World of Bad Science
and Big Business, Third World Network, Gateway Books, MacMillan, Continuum, Penang,
Malaysia, Bath, UK, Dublin, Ireland, New York, USA, 1998, 1999, 2007 (reprint with
extended Introduction).
26. Ho MW. GM is dangerous and futile. Science in Society 40, 4-8, 2008.
27. Ho MW, Burcher S, Lim LC et al. Food Futures Now, Organic, Sustainable, Fossil Fuel
Free, ISIS/TWN, London/Penang, 2008, http://www.i-sis.org.uk/foodFutures.php
28. Ho MW, Cherry B, Burcher S and Saunders PT. Green Energies, 100% Renewables by
2050, ISIS/TWN, London/Penang, 2009, http://www.i-sis.org.uk/GreenEnergies.php
29. Ho MW. Beware the Biochar Initiative. In Ho MW, Cherry B, Burcher S and Saunders PT.
Green Energies, 100% Renewables by 2050, ISIS/TWN, London/Penang, 2009,
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/GreenEnergies.php
30. Ho MW. O2 dropping faster than CO2 rising. Science in Society 44, 8-10, 2009.
14
31. Ho MW. Sustainable agriculture, green energies and the green circular economy. Based on
invited lectures at the International Workshop on Sustainable Food and Agriculture, Remin
University, Beijing 13-15 March 2010.
32. Ho MW. Dream Farm 2, sustainable, organic, and free from fossil fuels. In Ho MW,
Burcher S, Lim LC, et al. Food Futures Now, Organic, Sustainable, Fossil Fuel Free,
ISIS/TWN, London/Penang, 2008, http://www.i-sis.org.uk/foodFutures.php
33. Ho MW. Dream Farm. In Ho MW, Burcher S, Lim LC, et al. Food Futures Now, Organic,
Sustainable, Fossil Fuel Free, ISIS/TWN, London/Penang, 2008, http://www.i-
sis.org.uk/foodFutures.php
34. Ho MW. Circular economy of the dyke-pond system. In Ho MW, Burcher S, Lim LC, et al.
Food Futures Now, Organic, Sustainable, Fossil Fuel Free, ISIS/TWN, London/Penang,
2008, http://www.i-sis.org.uk/foodFutures.php
35. Eisentraut A. Sustainable Production of Second-Generation Biofuels. Potential and
perspectives in major economics and developing countries, Information Paper, International
Energy Agency, February 2010, Paris, France
36. Trade and Environment Review 2009/2010, Promoting poles of clean growth to foster the
transition to a more sustainable economy, United Nations, Geneva, 2010.
37. Ho MW. Green growth for developing nations. Science in Society 46 (to appear).
38. Ho MW. The Rainbow and the Worm, The Physics of Organisms, 3rd enlarged edition,
World Scientific, Singapore & London, 2008, http://www.i-sis.org.uk/rnbwwrm.php
15