 | (Peak Oil) Ignorance is Strength ? | The Oil Drum: Campfire | The Big Picture - What Have You Changed Your Mind About? |  |
87 comments on Ecological Economics and the Food System
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
87 comments on Ecological Economics and the Food System
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
User login
Contact
- campfire at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
Archives
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
The Oil Drum: Local archives
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
The Oil Drum: New York City archives
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
GAIA Host Collective
This is a very interesting topic. I knew how resource intensive cattle can be, but I'm suprised by how low chicken and eggs are. How could chicken be more efficient than grain when we feed grain to chicken?
I believe the answer is that the graph is showing an average per household breakdown, not a per product one. People eat many more cereals than chicken, eggs and fish, but you are almost certainly correct that the energy intensity of producing those are higher. Look at the graphs in the original article to see the many ways these data can be viewed. It is a pretty short read.
Thanks, I figured that out too after looking at the graph again later. It's per household instead of per unit of product.
I get a cookie error on the link, though. It should be:
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/es702969f
instead of :
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/es702969f?cookieSet=1
I feed my chickens grain during winter and as supplement during warm months. They are amazing omnivores and will happily eat table scraps, grass & grass clippings, bugs, worms, etc. That's one of the wonderful things about chickens, they eat real low on the food chain and are our compost makers. You do need to be careful with them in the garden though, as they like to eat the plants too.
chickens, they eat real low on the food chain
Yes. Rabbits and fish are also good 'converters' of input into protein.
My questions are
1 what proportion of a modern society's energy is devoted to food production today vs 100 years ago
2 what proportion of the average family income is devoted to food purchase today vs 100 years ago
my point is, if energy gets a lot more expensive, it will have myriad effects. I read that in the UK in the 30's, people were spending 35% of income on food, and this was normal.
i think today we spend 10%
the food supply is similar to the energy supply - we take it for granted and it is based on just in time delivery, but i think food is more important than energy, as we will painfully discover
and we should have a web site called "the Food Bowl" to parallel the Oil Drum as a discussion forum
In the US of A if 1/3 of your cash goes to the government and 1/3 goes to housing what happens when food goes from 1/10th to 1/3?
The US obesity epidemic is solved!
Really, food production and transport is only using 3.3QUADS 3.3% of energy, people can buy less packaging, buy less meat, eat out on junk food less, and still only spend <10% on food.
What proportion of the average family income is devoted to food purchase today vs. 100 years ago?
It was common to spend a large portion of the family income on food 100 years ago. My favorite example is the cost of a 3 pound chicken, in hours worked:
Hours: minutes
1900 2:40
1910 3:05
1920 2:27
1930 2:01
1940 1:24
1950 1:11
1960 0:33
1970 0:22
1980 0:18
1990 0:14
In round numbers, we work (1/12)th as long to buy that chicken as in 1900, or a reduction of 92%.
From: Myths of Rich and Poor (Michael Cox and Richard Alm) Table 2.2. This books has numerous charts and tables of economic data and features over 40 pages of references.
This is the 20th Century productivity miracle. Factors include chemical fertilizers, agricultural mechanization, trucks and the highway system, refrigeration, electricity and better farm practices and industrial poultry management/processing (Conagra).
My grandfather's first job, working in an ice house, paid $0.10 per hour around 1912, about $2/hr today. Sawmills paid about $2/day ($40 today), which was from 10 to 12 hours. Ford Motor Co. was revolutionary for paying $5/day, which they could afford to because by using assembly lines and they were able to dramatically lower car prices.