scale aspects of the environmental balance of food supply chains elmar schlich inra 2010, 11.03.2010...

Scale aspects ofthe environmental balance of

food supply chains

Elmar Schlich

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 1

Topics

Terms: environment, food, aliments, regionality

Case studies: method, theses, results

Discussion: population, acreage, crop, maintenance

Conclusions

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 2

Scale aspects of environmental balanceof food supply chains

Topics




Conclusions

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 3


Environment

Ecosphere Technosphere

Interaction

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 4


Environment



Interaction

* breathable air* foods* raw material* energy carrier

* solid waste* liquid waste* emissions* noise* off heat

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 5

Environment


Interaction

* breathable air* foods* raw material* energy carrier

* solid waste* liquid waste* emissions* noise* off heat

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 6


Food – means for living (German: “Lebensmittel”)

Drinking water: food no. 1regional supply of communal waterworksconsumption approx. 120 litres per day and personprice approx. 4 € per 1,000 litres or 0.4 Eurocent per litre

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 7


Food – means for living

Drinking water: food no. 1regional supply of communal waterworksconsumption approx. 120 litres per day and personprice approx. 4 € per 1,000 litres or 0.4 Eurocent per litre

consumer

agriculture

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 8


Complete process chain for aliments

Consumer

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 9Agriculture



Point of Sale↕

Wholesale trade↕

Intermediate trade↕

Final production↕

Intermediate production(s)↕

Agriculture

Consumer

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 10



Point of Sale↕

Wholesale trade↕

Intermediate trade↕

Final production↕

Intermediate production(s)↕

Agriculture

external distribution



external transport

external transport

Consumer

professional players• traceability• HACCP• TQM (ISO 9000 ff)• LCA (ISO 14000 ff)• IFS, EurepGAP, ...

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 11


Regionalitydifferent definitions:

national frontiers, economic areasgeographical frontiers, historical frontierstraffic and sale routescultural frontiers, ethnical frontiers

Food and aliments Distance to market

local less than 50 km

regional less than 500 km

European - continental less than 2,500 km

global more than 2,500 km

emotional !

rational !

Home ! Confidence !

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 12


Topics




Conclusions

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 13


Method* analysis of the whole process chain* from primary production up to food retailing* ascertainment of delivered energy transformation* allocation to functional unit

Popular established thesis: food miles concept* impact to environment expected to be proportional to

distance of marketplace* large distance = high impact to environment! * local food = low impact to environment!

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 14


Public opinion in Germany:

The energy use per kg aliment is proportional to marketing distance!

„close = well!“

„the closer the better!“

Food miles concept

→ distance of transportation

• apples grown in the own garden

• wine from the own vineyard• potatoes and milk

from the farmer nextdoor

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 15


But: specific efforts!

Vehicle effort per kg

car? very big!

van? big!

truck? effective!

inland water vessel? more effective!

seagoing vessel? very effective!

cargo plane? very ineffective!

→ distance of transportation

?

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 16


Hypothesis: The bigger the enterprise the smaller the specific use of delivered energy!

„Ecology of Scale“

?

In analogy to economy:

the bigger the quantity the lower the costs of each item!

„Economy of Scale“

→ size of enterpriseINRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 17


Specific use of delivered energy as function of business size

y = 93.943 x-0.2952 (R2 = 0.87)

2.9 – 7.9 kWh/kgResults beef

global transport:~ 1.8 kWh/kg

local transport:~ 1.4 – 2.0 kWh/kg

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 18


Specific use of primary energy as function of business size

y = 95.164 x-0.274 (R2 = 0.84)

3.9 – 9.5 kWh/kgResults beef

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 19


Specific emission of CO2 (carbon footprint) as function of business size

y = 26.325 x-0.2947 (R2 = 0.85)

local: 1,4 - 2,2 kg CO2/kg

Results beef

global:0,8 kg CO2/kg

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 20


Beef: local farming in Germany

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 21


Local beef: typical transport unit

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 22


Local beef: at butcher´s (handicraft)

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 23


Local beef in Germany

Characteristics:

• short distances, local food (< 50 km)

• artificial insemination, intensive breeding, fattening in the farm

• use of concentrated feed

• local butcheries with long-term regional delivery contracts

• transport of small units to the butchery, empty return

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 24


Global beef: Black Angus in Argentina

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 25


Global beef: breeding of bulls

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 26


Global beef: breeding bull

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 27


Global beef: cowboy, Gaucho [Krause 2008]

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 28


Global beef: slaughterhouse in Buenos Aires

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 29


Global beef: transport units

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 30


Global beef – Argentina

Characteristics:

• long-distance transport of more than 16,000 km

• extensive breeding and fattening of cattle herds

• all-season herding of cattle on grassland, no concentrated feed

• cattle drive to the gathering place, transport by truck to the slaughterhouse

• cooled transport overseas in 20“- reefers with 11 t beef each

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 31


Beef – quantitative aspects of the German market

consumption: 12.5 kg per annum and capita

Consumption per annum: 1 million tons

German production: 1.17 mio tons

level of self sufficiency: 117 %

export per annum: 270,000 tons

import per annum: 100,000 tons

therefrom from Argentina: 26,000 tons = 26 %INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 32


Beef – quality aspects of the German market

Cuts of inferior quality hamburger, minced meat

Cuts of medium quality boiling meat, braised meat

Cuts of high standard steaks, filet, carpaccio

Public opinion regarding beef from Argentina:

• High quality („Hilton-cuts“)

• no „mad cow desease“ (BSE)

• assumption: high energy input due to long-distance transport

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 33



Results beef

• local• global

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 34



Results: pork

• local• regional • European-continental

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 35


specific use of delivered energy as function of business size

results: apples

DLV 2009, 17.01.2009: page 36

level of self sufficiency: approx. 30%(seasonal between 0 und 100 %)



Results: wine estate bottled

level of self sufficiency: ca. 34 %

• regional • European-continental• global

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 37


Topics




Conclusions

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 38


Population in Germany [Mio] 2009: 82 Mio

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 39


Population in Germany [Mio]

DLV 2009, 17.01.2009: page 40

2009: 82 Mio

Density of population in industrialized countries1. The Netherlands: 3952. Japan: 3373. United Kingdom of Great Britain: 2494. Germany: 231 inhabitants/km²

in comparison:France: 112, USA: 30, Sweden: 20


Agricultural land in Germany [Mio ha] 2009: 17 Mio ha

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 41


Wheat crop in Germany per hectar[dt/ha] 2009: ~80 dt/ha

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 42


Self sufficiency in Germany

• drinking water: 100 % (local food no. 1)

• mineral water, beer almost 100 %; wine 34 %

• fruits and vegetables: on average 20 % (seasonal effects!)

bananas: 0 %, tropical fruits 0 %, apples 33 %

• meat products, processed meats: 60 – 100 % (60 % for lamb)

• cereals: 0 – 100 % (0 % for rice)

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 43


Topics




Conclusions

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 44


Conclusions (1)

• Ecology of Scale confirmed

unit size more important than transport distance !

• local - regional - seasonal

brilliant if business size is sufficient !

• European-continental - global

not automatically more environmental pollution !

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 45


Conclusions (2)

• role of the end consumer has to be clarified!

10 to 20 % food spoilage in households

energy for storing and preparation at home

energy for transport to shop and back

20 % of all car rides only for shopping!

163.7 bn Pkm = 4.5 bn litres of fuel = 12 Mio. t CO2

On average nearly 2,000 km per annum and household!

additionally: 200 g CO2/kg foodINRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 46


Conclusions (3)

Climate labels for food ?

In that case conclusions might follow like:

• red card in general for too small local enterprises ???

• red card in general for German apples in springtime ???

• red card in general for intensive stock farming ???

No, because every process chain has to be evaluated differently!Regional and seasonal effects have to be taken into consideration!

Other aspects have been ignored!

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 47


Thanks to

* DFG

* DAAD

* Justus Liebig Universitity Giessen and my group

Thank you for your attention and

looking for questions and discussion!

INRA 2010, 11.03.2010 page 48


scale aspects of the environmental balance of food supply chains elmar schlich inra 2010, 11.03.2010...

Documents