food for thought jos oseph poore
play

Food for Thought JOS OSEPH POORE OXFORD UNIVERSITEIT VOEDS - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Kennissymposium 13 maart 2020 Voedselvisie: # food oodforth thou ought #voeds dselv lvis isie Food for Thought JOS OSEPH POORE OXFORD UNIVERSITEIT VOEDS DSELVOETAFDR DRUK: IMPACT V VAN AN VOED EDSEL O OP DE P E PLAN ANEET


  1. Kennissymposium 13 maart 2020 Voedselvisie: # food oodforth thou ought #voeds dselv lvis isie Food for Thought

  2. JOS OSEPH POORE OXFORD UNIVERSITEIT VOEDS DSELVOETAFDR DRUK: IMPACT V VAN AN VOED EDSEL O OP DE P E PLAN ANEET (INCL. Q Q&A &A) # food odfor orthou ought #vo voed edsel selvi visi sie

  3. Food’s Environmental Impacts and an Integrated Solution Presentation to Party for the Animals Conference, 13 th March 2020 Joseph Poore

  4. urce: Ellis et al. (2010) Urban Sour 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

  5. urce: Ellis et al. (2010) Urban Mixed Crops Sour 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

  6. urce: Ellis et al. (2010) Urban Mixed Crops Pasture Rangelands Sour 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

  7. Commod odit ity C Crop op D Driven Defor orestation on (million hectares) 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 Sour urce: Curtis et al (2018); Global Forest Watch

  8. >13,000 Sour urce: IUCN (2018)

  9. Greenhouse Gas Emissions 5% 26% Food Sour urce: NOAA (2018) Sour urce: Poore & Nemecek (2018)

  10. Acid Rain 32% Food Sour urce: Poore & Nemecek (2018)

  11. Eutrophication 78% 25,000km 2 Food “dead zone” in the Gulf of Mexico Sour urce: NOAA (2018) Sour urce: Poore & Nemecek (2018)

  12. Scarcity-Weighted Water Use 90% Food Sour urce: Poore & Nemecek (2018)

  13. Food C Consumption (trillion calories per day) 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700 1750 1800 1850 1900 1950 2000 2050 Sour urce: Adapted from Smith (2015), using data from FAOSTAT and the UN

  14. Food C Consumption (trillion calories per day) 40 35 30 Forecast Annua nual C Consum umption i n in 2050: 050: 25 • 1.2 trillion litres of dairy 20 • 500 billion kilograms of meat 15 10 5 0 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700 1750 1800 1850 1900 1950 2000 2050 Sour urce: Adapted from Smith (2015), using data from FAOSTAT and the UN; adapted from FAO forecasts

  15. 570 m 0 million f n farms >2 m 2 million c crop p varieties i s in n seed eed 430 b 0 brands nds va vaults 14 c 14 compa panies o s own n 54 o 54 of the he Food p produc uced i ed in ev every c climate larges est b brands nds and s soil, l, w with o optim imal p l practic ices for ea each

  16. Summa mary 1. 1. Agriculture s sit its a at t the h heart of of alm almost all all envir ironmental p l proble lems 2. 2. Achieving s sustainability w will become h e harder er g given en g growi wing d g demand 3. 3. Solutions m must b t be effecti tive e over er millions o of d diver erse e producer ers

  17. Source: Poore & Nemecek (2018)

  18. Source: Poore & Nemecek (2018)

  19. Greenhouse Gas Emissions kg CO 2 eq 0 1 2 3 1000 kcal Cassava Rice (flooded) Oatmeal Potatoes Wheat & Rye (Bread) Maize (Meal) Low impact producers High impact producers 10 th percentile 90 th percentile Source: Poore & Nemecek (2018)

  20. • Large variabil ilit ity a across a all i indi ndicators, , inc nclud uding i in n simila lar g geographic regio ions ns • Implie ies a a targeted mitigatio ion a n appr pproach w h will ha have hi highe hest i impa pact Greenhouse Gas Emissions Acidification Eutrophication Land Use kg CO 2 eq g SO 2 eq g PO 4 3- eq m 2 ·year 0 1 2 3 0 18 0 36 0 2 4 6 1000 kcal Cassava Rice (flooded) Oatmeal Potatoes Wheat & Rye (Bread) Maize (Meal) 0 2 4 6 0 72 0 36 0 0,4 0,8 1,2 1 kg Tomatoes Brassicas Onions & Leeks Root Vegetables 0 1 2 3 0 45 0 18 0 2,5 5 7,5 1 kg Berries Bananas Apples Citrus Low impact producers High impact producers 10 th percentile 90 th percentile Source: Poore & Nemecek (2018)

  21. • There a e are e differ erent c causes of environmen ental impact f for d differ eren ent f farmer ers • We ne need t d to be be flexibl xible a and l nd let the hem de deliver mitig igatio ion ho however works be best f for the hem Source: Poore & Nemecek (2018)

  22. • Large variabil ilit ity a across a all i indi ndicators, , inc nclud uding i in n simila lar g geographic regio ions ns • Implie ies a a targeted mitigatio ion a n appr pproach w h will ha have hi highe hest i impa pact Greenhouse Gas Emissions Acidification Eutrophication Land Use kg CO 2 eq g SO 2 eq g PO 4 3- eq m 2 ·year 0 10 20 30 0 180 0 180 0 40 80 120 100g of protein Beef (beef herd) Lamb & Mutton Crustaceans (farmed) Beef (dairy herd) Cheese Pig Meat Fish (farmed) Poultry Meat Eggs Tofu Groundnuts Other Pulses Peas Nuts 0 2 4 6 0 36 0 24 0 4 8 12 1 litre Cow’s milk Soymilk Low impact producers High impact producers 10 th percentile 90 th percentile Source: Poore & Nemecek (2018)

  23. Netherland nds: G GHG e emissio ions ns r rela lated t to f food unde under di different di diets GHG emissions per capita (kg CO2eq, IPCC 2013) 2,985 1,638 582 261 127 -152 Source: Poore, Clark & Springmann (2020)

  24. Netherland nds: E Eut utrophying e emissio ions related t to f food unde under di different di diets Eutrophying emissions per capita (g PO43-eq, CML2 baseline) 10,247 7,434 5,508 5,813 4,132 3,469 Source: Poore, Clark & Springmann (2020)

  25. • Bene nefit it o of e eating less o of a a hi high i h impa pact pr produ duct inc ncrease by cho hoosing t the he m most s sus ustaina nably pr produc uced • Consumers can n make s suc uch h cho hoice i if value ue c cha hain c n cha hann nnels ena nabl ble i ide dentity pr preservatio ion n Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Gt CO 2 eq) Change in Greenhouse Gas Emissions Consume 20% less, targeting the highest impact producers 50% reduction in animal Animal-Product Oils Sugars AlcoholsStimulants products, targeting Free Diet highest impact producers 0 0% -4 -25% -10,4 -14,7 -8 -50% Weighted Average = -45% -12 -75% 70% -16 -100% A 30% reduction in global GHG emissions across all sectors Source: Poore & Nemecek (2019)

  26. Source: Poore (2018) The Guardian; mondra.green

  27. Source: https://mondra.green

  28. Source: https://mondra.green

  29. Household appliance market share by energy efficiency group 60% 1992 (labels introduced) 40% 20% 0% 60% 2018 40% 20% 0% G F E D C B A A + A ++ A +++ Source: CECED

  30. Summa mary 1. 1. Very y signif ific ican ant potential ial t to r o reduce f food ood’s i imp mpac acts 2. 2. Mitigation requires es a a sophisti ticated ed a approach, e engaging f g full s supply-cha chain 3. 3. Mandatory l labels a are t the e most p t promising w way t to shift t ft the e en entire s system

Recommend


More recommend