Article in Harper's on Energy Usage

[Guest guest]

Some interesting points are made by one Richard Manning, in his article,

"The Oil We Eat: Following the food chain back to Iraq," appearing in the

February, 2004, issue of Harper's Magazine.

 

Regarding processed foods, the author states, "There is another energy

matter to consider here, though. The grinding, milling, wetting, drying,

and baking of a breakfast cereal requires about four calories of energy for

every calorie of food energy it produces. A two-pound bag of breakfast

cereal burns the energy of a half-gallon of gasoline in its making. All

together the food-processing industry in the United States uses about ten

calories of fossil-fuel energy for every calorie of food energy it produces.

 

"That number does not include the fuel used in transporting the food from

the factory to a store near you, or the fuel used by millions of people

driving to thousands of super discount stores on the edge of town, where the

land is cheap" (44).

 

Manning goes on to point out the energy inefficiency of growing foods to be

fed to animals, so that humans can then enjoy flesh foods, which provide

only a fraction of the energy required to produce those foods. Not really

new information to us, but interesting to read in a fairly prominent

publication.

 

What to speak of the energy wasted in food production, he makes a

provocative statement about converting corn to ethanol: "Fuel alcohol

already ranks second as a use for processed corn in the United States, just

behind corn sweeteners. According to one set of calculations, we spend more

calories of fossil-fuel energy making ethanol than we gain from it. The

Department of Agriculture says the ratio is closer to a gallon and a quart

of ethanol for every gallon of fossil fuel we invest. The USDA calls this a

bargain, because gasohol is a 'clean fuel'" (44).

 

Other statements made by the author are a bit obtuse, such as this one:

"Vegetarians claim their habits are kinder to animals, though it is

difficult to see how wiping out 99 percent of wildlife's habitat is a

kindness" (44). He seems to have some sympathy for wildlife, but none for

domesticated creatures. Overall, though, the article supplies some pretty

good points about the wastefulness of the industrialization and

commercialization of Western food production and distribution.

 

We might wonder whether anyone out there, besides devotees, will pay

attention to this kind of article. It should be obvious (shouldn't it?)

that our present Western "civilization" is hanging by a very slender thread

(oil pipeline), and is tenable only with relatively cheap energy sources,

oil and coal.

 

How much time does our movement have to establish working, self-sufficient

farming communities, before the mass exodus from the cities begins? Can you

imagine the preaching opportunities that will be there when thousands, or

millions, of persons are carrying whatever belongings they can haul on their

backs or in wagons and wheelbarrows away from the cities and into the

countrysides, where they can find water to drink, and soil in which to raise

food? Will we be ready to accomodate them and train them?

 

Rupanuga das