Energy fears are forcing dairy giant Fonterra to look at new ways of securing electricity for its plants and factories.
And with some of its dairy factories sited in windy areas, the prospect of using wind turbines is looking increasingly likely.
Fonterra operations director Max Parkin told a forum in Auckland yesterday that the company - the country's second biggest energy user after aluminium-maker Comalco - was being threatened by uncertainty over its power supplies.
Energy prices had risen dramatically in the past four years and there was not enough competition in gas, coal or power transmission.
This included a 23 per cent rise in the price of coal, a 35 per cent lift in the cost of electricity and a 97 per cent jump in the cost of natural gas... _________________ Let us make him who shall nourish and sustain us. What shall we do to be invoked; to be remembered in the earth.
We have tried with our first creatures but we could not make them venerate us.
So let us try to make obedient respectful beings who shall
Joined: Dec 27, 2004 Posts: 12473 Location: zombie horde wonderland
Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2005 6:25 am Post subject: Re: Energy fears force dairy giant Fonterra to rethink
skiwi wrote:
This included a 23 per cent rise in the price of coal, a 35 per cent lift in the cost of electricity and a 97 per cent jump in the cost of natural gas...
There is a huge dairy by me who is complete self-sufficient for the elecricity. They use all the cow poo!
JR
Maybe in terms of electricity. But what about the caloric value of the dairy's output (the milk) versus its energy inputs (feed and diesel/gasoline)? When you look at this or any other modern farming industry, you will see huge inputs (fertilizer, pesticides,tractor fuel, grain harvesting, grain drying/shipment, plus whatever fuel the dairy will use) with a comparitively puny output (milk plus whatever wastes are recovered for energy or fertilizer).
That's the problem with modern ag...its too energy dependent to produce those large yields we are accustomed to. _________________ UNplanning the future...
http://unplanning.blogspot.com
I wonder if anybody has tested the concept of low-energy agriculture. High tech is allowed as long as it needs little energy. And I wonder what are the yields.
Doly, Masanobu Fukuoka does "low energy" farming, in that he uses no fertilisers or pesticides or tractors at all. His yields are as high as, if not higher than, the best farms in his country. He wrote a book called "One Straw Revolution" which I highly recommend. The yields of organic, permaculture and biodynamic farming can be as high as normal crops, but they won't work in a monoculture framework. Hence it just wouldn't be possible to have 100's of acres of corn grown organically/permaculturally. These methods depend upon a variety of plants and animals together, the more the better (ok, oversimplified).
That's why you'll see a lot of us on the planning forum advocating a return to locally produced products. They can be grown organically with little or no energy (from fossil fuels) needed, but they cant provide massive amounts of one crop. Your local farm shops should be able to supply a smaller number of people with a larger number of products (this is one way of doing it). Obviously some will specialise, but nowhere near the scale of agriculture today. _________________ We've tried nothin' and we're all out of ideas.
I am only one. I can only do what one can do. But what one can do, I will do. -- John Seymour.
I wonder if anybody has tested the concept of low-energy agriculture. High tech is allowed as long as it needs little energy. And I wonder what are the yields.
One interesting parallel is Cuba, where in the early nineties the oil, food and fertilizer imports from the Soviet Union dramatically collapsed. Cuba shifted to a smaller scale system with organic methods and urban farming playing a large role and this seems to have paid off.
Somehow though I don't think this scenario would play out as successfully in the US, I think a lot of the "breadbasket" land in places like Iowa and Nebraska, has been drained of much of its nutrients and topsoil. Plus there's the question of transportation, I don't think Cuba was/is as urbanized.
Joined: Dec 27, 2004 Posts: 12473 Location: zombie horde wonderland
Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2005 3:02 pm Post subject:
qwanta wrote:
I think a lot of the "breadbasket" land in places like Iowa and Nebraska, has been drained of much of its nutrients and topsoil.
Sadly, this is very true. Much of our agricultural land is essentially dead, having been ruined through cultivation and chemicals. This kind of land could be switched to non-conventional agriculture, but initial yields would be very low because organic agriculture depends on humus in the soil, and there isn't any. This is one reason it's difficult to transition to organic agriculture even within the conventional ag system; initially yields are so low, and pest problems are so high, the producer has to be prepared for several years of losses.
The background to this gloomy view of this country’s future supply potential is the picture of New Zealand’s productive capacity being submerged under urban sprawl and lifestyle blocks, while water restrictions, energy costs and resource consents for every aspect of dairying will make it uneconomic for all but the largest farmers. The alternative picture is to commit to a strategy and an action plan to counter the doomsday scenario.
At the same time, European and British dairy farmers are facing dwindling subsidies and falling milk prices which are forcing many to give up dairy farming altogether.
So the next big question is: "Who is going to pick up the supply shortfall and become the world’s milk producers?"
Fonterra has clearly identified South America as a source of supply and has already invested in dairy companies in that part of the world.
Quote:
For too many years since 1990, irrigation and increased use of fertiliser have fuelled the potential for land-use change, according to the latest trend in global commodity prices, with the result that the price of land has sky-rocketed and the pressure on resources has risen enormously.
large-scale dairy farms (herds of 500+ cows) are starting to dominate nz dairying, which is a massive change in just one generation. 25 years ago the average herd was not much more than 100 head.
this corporatised model is totally unsustainable, and PO will destroy it.
This industry is indeed screwed. Animal confinement operations that yield a consumeable product on a large production scale are totally dependent on cheap energy. It takes cheap energy to raise the grains for feed (including all of the attendant losses in efficiency), power the dairy equipment and chill, process and distribute the milk/dairy products. On a caloric basis, significantly more energy went into the production of that dairy product you are consuming than the product yields in calories.
Dairying is huge in my county. It is far and away the largest single product we produce and thanks to the 450K cows here accounts for 26% of California's milk production. It's also a dirty industry in both air and water pollution terms. Our landscapes in some areas are pock-marked with cess pits (known as lagoons) full of cow effluent.
Quote:
So the next big question is: "Who is going to pick up the supply shortfall and become the world’s milk producers?"
In the short term, California's central valley is stepping into that role. Land is cheap, labor is cheap, seasons good, regulatory environment supportive. As long as we can consider the absurdity of producing milk here, trucking it 200 miles to the LA for processing and returning it back here for sale. (let alone exporting it to other places-which we do)
In the long term we're screwed. More accuruately--theyre screwed. Where in the world do they think the feed will come from or their milk go to once the energy subsidy runs out? _________________ UNplanning the future...
http://unplanning.blogspot.com
In the long term we're screwed. More accuruately--theyre screwed. Where in the world do they think the feed will come from or their milk go to once the energy subsidy runs out?
dairying in NZ differs from most places in that all cows are grazed on fresh pasture for most of the year. they are never fed grains, only grass, hay and an occasional rotation crop like turnips.
the trouble is, even fifty years ago this industry relied on large amounts of synthetic fertilizers, mainly superphosphate made from guano mined on Nauru. Nauru is now stripped, so they have moved on to other sources of fertilizers.
the only partial solution is to move to a low-input organic dairying model. some farmers have done this successfully but the startup costs and low yields in the initial years are a significant barrier.
PO is going to have a major impact on dairying worldwide, just like it will with beef production. dairy products will return to their prior luxury status for most of the world, just like beef will.
the trouble is, even fifty years ago this industry relied on large amounts of synthetic fertilizers, mainly superphosphate made from guano mined on Nauru. Nauru is now stripped, so they have moved on to other sources of fertilizers
Can I ask what they're doing with all that dairy cow sh1t? _________________ We've tried nothin' and we're all out of ideas.
I am only one. I can only do what one can do. But what one can do, I will do. -- John Seymour.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
