Sustainable cooking

Global Warming: The rich get richer, the poor dry up.

Global Warming: The rich get richer, the poor dry up.

Hang your clothes out to dry now so poor countries won't  be too dry to produce food.

As temperatures around the world get higher, the countries closer to the equator will produce less food  by the end of the century. In fact the center for global development is predicting a global loss in agriculture, but the closer to the equator the higher the loss becomes.

As I spun my child’s globe and looked at the equator the countries that hang on this arid global necklace, I noticed they are mainly developing countries already struggling. Africa, which already seems to be the disaster punching bag of the earth, with famine, drought and disease all frequent problems, will potentially loose between 17 to 20% of its agricultural production, perpetuating the vast difference in wealth from the third world to the industrial nations.

 Given an increasing global population the numbers can only add up to more disparity among people, leading to more wars and terrorism.

 The good news is that there may still be time to stop the worst from happening. If people, as well as countries, start being more energy conscious it’s possible to slow this process down. If we all think about our actions daily, we can have an effect.

 The most powerful thing I have done for my children recently, was to make a clothes line where I could hang my laundry. Reuse is another powerful tool, anything we can use twice reduces energy production on that item by half. Plastic bags and bottles can all be reused, clothe napkins instead of paper, even given the water, soap and energy to wash them still decrease transportation, even if a comparison to production is a zero net gain.

 The bad news is action must be taken soon to avoid massive global inequities and starvation, the good news is that each of us can take simple steps to do it.

 

Mobile Farming: Back to the Savannah

Post-industrial farms based on the Savanna’s ecosystem

In every continent vast herds of large herbivores move through grass lands, grazing on the green grass leaves but leaving the rhizomes’ regenerative root structure in place. This is then followed by flocks of insects, predators and birds, all of which contribute a vital product or service. The procession leaves behind a rich, vibrant layer of manure and bacteria that will make its way into the soil, combined with the cast off roots the grass no longer needs for its diminished solar production due to lack of green leaves, This creates a fertile subterranean ecosystem of worms, rodents and, once again, bacteria. The ecosystem then creates the ideal conditions for the grass to re-grow for the return of a herd in two to three weeks. This ecosystem has been around since before the dinosaurs.

Our inefficient industrial food production system takes the herd, makes it stationary, brings the stationary grass (corn) to the herd, loosing resources at every step. Nitrate rich manure, carrying precious enzymes produces proteins in the way of bugs which roaming herds would spread over the land, never leaves the pasture. At the same time we manufacture nitrates using a large amount of petroleum so that the corn can grow to feed the cattle. Much of the nitrates gets blown off by the wind, or washed away with rainfall, due to lack of sufficient top soil, which has been eliminated by the years of intensive industrial production and tilling. Birds are then grown in a completely different place, their droppings becoming a hot nitrate intensive waste. Their natural ability of aerating the soil and doing bug control by pecking for grubs in the manure of the herd is wasted. To make use of the waste products in the industrial system, transportation is needed, even though cattle and poultry thrive on movement. Each one of the industrial production facilities create an intense density of unutilized resources like a giant Petri dish, which breed germs, fungi and pests to the plant or animal grown on the land, creating the need for pesticides, fungicides, and antibiotics. These in turn kill off not only the desired invasive organisms, but also peripheral desired organisms, like bees killed due to pesticides or bacteria by antibiotics

  Some calculations have this inefficient system responsible for as many green house gases as cars, Excess methane is created by feeding cows corn, not grasses. This also creates a carbon intensive production of nitrates to grow the corn and as additives into feed. The waste from this has been tied to the destruction of wet lands, contamination of ground water, and even the creation of dead zones in the ocean..

So how do we use the savanna’s efficiencies in modern food production? On a small scale, Polyface Farms, written about in Michael Pollan’s book The Omnivore’s Dilemma, has many of the answers. The real trick of the Polyface Farms example is mobility of the animals and permanency of the plants. To do this on a grand scale, the post-industrial food production would need to have a paradigm shift in the way of thinking. Each producer must see themselves as true stewards of the land, not owners. The bureau of land management would have to assist the producers with guidance as to when land is ready for the herd, poultry or farming, and when it just needs a break. Ranchers would need to rotate their cattle as organic farmers do crops, throughout their land. Bird pens would need to be mobile (maybe solar powered to create a shelter for the birds as well) and enable birds to peck at the soil.

Imagine a herd of cattle, be it beef, bison, or other herbivores, being guided through our country, grazing the cattle, like one long cattle drive. A few days later the poultry farmer comes in a slow bird drive, truly free range, through the grazed fields. Using the grubs in the cow patties for food as well as the grasses, they leave behind a nitrogen rich patchwork of bird poop. Worms and bacteria then break this mix of animal by-products and create a layer of topsoil, helped by the turning of the ground by rodents, without the complete destruction of the root structure that prevents run off of soil. When a good, rich layer of topsoil has been built up, the farmers come in and do their magic, rotating crops for a few seasons, then moving to the next fertile fields, allowing the land they just moved away from to go back to the herd to regenerate. The only waste problems involved are that of the slaughterhouses. Distribution of the final products to the consumer would be the only transportation issue, assuming processing plants where appropriately placed on the route, all of which could be set up by rail along the parameters of the migratory route.

At least 5% of the total land mass is now used for food production. It’s a huge percentage of our land to degrade as we are now. If we keep up the present food production system, we will likely expand global warming, pollute our aquifers, destroy our topsoil, and promote antibiotic resistant diseases They also create more and larger dead zones in the ocean, which eliminate many fish breeding grounds as well as a host of many other environmental and social issues. Unless our population starts decreasing, we must at some point have a paradigm shift in our food production. Our present system is not sustainable, relying heavily on petroleum and manufactured nitrates. If we rely on the present growth and focus of sustainable foods, it will be decades before we get to partial solutions to these global issues, and many of the issues will still remain. Even 100% organic production will not be sufficient to address all the waste issues..

An alternative must be found, and where better to find a model but from what has worked for millions of years. It would not only reduce waste, but also reduce artificial chemical costs and replace it with labor. And best of all it could be sustainable for generations. The plains supported 60 to 100 million large bison in its hay day (no pun intended), our present beef production is 32 million cows so the numbers could work.

Atmospheric Nitrates Can Increase Forest Fires

Due to Nitrate saturated agricultural fields our atmosphere has a historically large amounts of nitrate “runoff “ (which is the term even if it is air born excess) is contributing to quicker growing forests and under brush. This increased growth has a positive effect of using up more CO2, a green house gas, but on the negative side the denser growth also contributes to forest fire dangers.

This is a good representation of the complexities of peoples effect on the world. On one hand the nitrates seem to help decrease the green house gasses, but in the long run the exacerbation of forest fires which increases green house gasses, and in turn creates more nitrate runoff. Nitrate runoff comes from agricultural nitrates as well as a small amount from burning fossil fuels.

More on the new menu

A menu remake for the twenty first century

The traditional menu which most people use today, grew up with the industrial revolution. Created before the time proteins became cheap and plentiful, our desire for them was created by scarcity, making the dense calories desirable. Now, when balance is important, for our environment and our health, it is time to rethink the structure of the menu. The focus on meats as the primary component of a dish is backwards.

As our bodies evolved with hunting and gathering, then agriculture, the main sustenance we needed were fruits and vegetables. The denser proteins, meat, were eaten in celebrations or seasonal harvesting due to the tremendous resources used in providing them, either in the human energy of hunting, or of crop production for livestock.

Dwindling resources, whether in energy, natural resources, or land make us need go back to eating habits from before industrial food production. There are many limiting factors in food production. Even something as essential to plant growth as potassium has a natural supply limit. In the 1920’s a German scientist was able to synthesize nitrogen, a previously limited resource, which enabled our agricultural industry to bloom with apparently no limits Its creation, however, is extremely energy intensive and will be limited by the cost or availablility of energy. No such advancement has been made with phosporous, another major building block for plant growth. The first of the natural resources, used in food production, that’s limit will be reached soon is oil, due to either availability or expense of environmental impact.

On the nutritional side, our bodies still crave the dense energy provided by proteins to satisfy an energetic life of hunting, gathering or working with livestock or crops. Even in the beginning of industrialization, factory work was very strenuous and burned off many calories. It was very difficult for people to eat enough sustain the energy needed to get through a day, so calories were fully used. In the modern day, an energetic life style rarely creates the need for more than 3 or 4 ounces of proteins, never mind all the increase of carbohydrates in our diet. Portion sizes have increased as the energy out put of people has decreased. It takes up to 7 times as much energy to create edible calories from meat than it does for fruits or vegetables so a vegetarian diet is much more efficient than a primarily carnivorous diet in food production.

Another factor in diets is whole grains have been replaced by refined products, reducing the amount of fiber in our diets. The fiber helps digest unneeded fats and keep the digestive tract and the blood stream cleaner, as well as provide for many other. nutrients needed for our diet. We also have increased the amount of carbohydrates eaten in our diet, much of which comes from liquids, such as soda’s and fruit drinks. These carbs are not processed by the body in the same way as solid carbs. This is especially true of High Fructose Corn Syrup. Combined with larger and larger portion sizes and we have a great recipe for obesity and diabetes.

Fortunately the solution for both of these problems is simple, though a seed change in society must take place for it to succeed. If you eat healthy, it will help the environment. Less meat and processed foods, and more whole grains are the key. Large portions of meats should be reserved for celebrations, not day today life. It is more important for us to think about what fruits and vegetables we eat than the protein.

Our new menu reflects this by giving vegetarian foundation plates as the start of building a meal. On top of this we offer sides of proteins and vegetarian add ons, to create as elaborate a meal as is desired. This allows for an inexpensive healthy meal that most people can afford, but also a tasty celebratory meal as well.

We also feature some creative dishes with whole grains, like our vegetarian chili using wheat berries, and our Mediterranean salad using kamut. We also feature some more traditional café faire like pot pies, soups and salad, using 85% organic fruits and vegetables, heratige and/or humanely treated meats, and rocky junior chickens. All of our pastries are made with organic flour and our chocolate is declared to be slave labor free. We try to achieve all this in a delicious, homey way. Soon we will even offer family style meals which reflect this idealism as well.

Global Warmings Silver Lining: Hope for the affluent.

It seems more and more often people are beginning to herald global warming as a positive thing. Lower heating bills for the northern or southern most hemisphere’s, nitrogen emissions from cars helping forests productivity. The list could be pages long, but the advantages are only going to be seen by those who can afford to adapt. When global food supplies are effected by drought, disease, depleted oceans diminishing land resources it is those just barely surviving that will bear the brunt.

To whale or not to whale

Whether it is nobler to curse the whale with the slings and arrows suffered by the largest land mammal in favor of a few struggling economies or to save for generations ahead the largest and most majestic aquatic animal.

As many countries are trying to legalize whale hunting, we should look at the ivory market for guidance. Many species of Elephants are on the brink of extinction or have become extinct due to similar problems facing whales.

Both have long gestation periods, and need expansive ranges to live in, so these species are highly vulnerable to man’s exploits. Diminishing land is a major factor in the elephants case, while diminishing food supplies are a major issue for the whales. Both are subject to a large amount of poaching as well.

The major difference is that we live in the terrestrial world with the elephant, but are unfamiliar with the whales aquatic world. We know very little about their environment, habits and needs. Its difficult to get a firm grip on what the present population of half the whale species in our oceans.

This makes it impossible to identifying when the whale population starts to diminish. If whaling is legalized in more countries we will have a hard time discerning illegal whale meat from legal whale meat. Unlike the case of marijuana, where supply would be plentiful if legalized, the whale meat would always be scarce, and there for be at a premium price. Presently whale meat sells for $100 per pound in Asia. Unless it is easy to identify the difference between legal whale meat and illegal whale meat, then a black market would thrive even more when the ban is lifted.

 Up to 5% of African elephant population is being poached right now. Other herds are extinct or in extreme danger of extinction. The difficulties of policing the oceans, with no national boundaries is exponentially more difficult than attempting this on land.

The only way of trying to stop poaching from happening is to limit the demand of the product as was shown with the ban on ivory in the late ‘80s which decreased poaching dramatically. The black market on ivory has grown recently due to wars, poverty and lack of focus by governments.

There is even a question as to what a reasonable level the whale population should be. A scientist recently discovered, through DNA, traditional whale populations were huge compared to the present populations. Unfortunately it would seem that our harvesting and polluting the oceans would make a return to those numbers impossible, leaving the long term survival of whales in doubt.

Ancient trade routes as a guide to sustainable products

If it could be delivered by boat or camel it could  be sustainably delivered today.

As carbon foot prints help define sustainability, Ancient trade routes can help us determine what can be delivered efficiently.

Through out the world ancient trade routes sold food that was dry, preserved, or could last for a long journey. This still make sense for long distance trade today.

Fresh foods should always be as local as possible, for the sake of sustainability and quality, however preserved food from afar could have a significantly positive political influence as well as having a good carbon foot print.

The Mayans trade was geared to feed huge cities, with out having beasts of burden. The carbon foot print was solely based on feeding people (deforestation being the primary issue).

The carbon foot print of an item that is shipped by freight from Michigan to California is much higher than on a slow boat from China, though present diesel engines in ships presently have a high sulfur oxide output  Products that need refrigeration increase energy use  hourly, so air freight might end up being better than ground for chilled items, due to shorter traveling time. There are many variables in predicting carbon foot prints. One exception to the camel rule is local products grown in hot houses, may have a larger carbon foot print than those shipped by air freight .

  Developing sustainable markets in a global scale can be just as important as developing local sustainability. We are all in one large ecosystem, dust from the Gobi desert blows into North America, so bad agricultural practices spread through out the world, so if our decisions can limit pesticides in china it helps our local environment as well as globally.

Local food is normally the most sustainable  but outside of a 100 mile range the the advantages become cloudy. The question then becomes how does the product get here, and how much energy does it take to produce it at its origin. Political issues must also be considered. If a region is developing it is better to ensure that it starts sustainably than trying to do catch up later. After pesticides and herbicides have already been used, it takes years to convert back to organic production.

Farm Skyscrapers: Food goes vertical

Bringing farms into the city.

Could Sky scrapers full of crops and animals be a solution to our future food production problems?

Imagine a building 20 stories tall, which combines pigs production a farm with chicken production, fertilizer plant, hydroponics production, water purification system, and an energy plant.

In 2004 the land used for agricultural and food production was about the size of Brazil, or 5% of the total surface of the earth, as much as 38 percent of the land mass. With increasing populations, land is going to be at a limiting factor, setting greenhouse gas reducing forests against vital food production for people.

A Professor at Columbia University, Dr. Dickson Despommier has come up with one solution, urban skyscraper farms. The technology includes a self sustaining ecosystem which could purify water and human waste, create its own energy, and provide local produced food for a city. All this done organically.

The advantages of the vertical farm are many, but some of the highlights are year round crops, no herbicides, pesticides or fertilizers, and the elimination of environmentally disastrous run off.  If used on a large scale it could allow reforestation of land that has been taken for agriculture. Loss of forest is a major contributer to global warming.

Although it may be possible to include raising some animals on the farm, Dr Despommier isn't so sure about going all the way to cattle, citing concerns about humane treatment of cattle. Due to the present deplorable system of feed lots he hasn't ruled the possibility out.

Are bee's the environmental canary!in te coal mine?

Honey Bee's primitive genetic code makes it more susceptible to disease, parasites and climate change.

Does this simple structure make it the bellwether  for what is to come in the global food chain? The recent bee die offs seem to be from a variety of different problems, not any single issue as has been true of past die offs. This suggests a species on the brink of collapse.

80 million years ago bees developed a symbiotic relationship with the new flowering plants. The plants provided food for the bees, and the bees provided sex for the plants. The flowering plants had developed 45 million years previous, but it took 25 million years for them to get a solid footing. This relationship has gone on relatively unchanged since.

Due to this lack of need to change, bees genetic structure has remained primitive, leaving it defenseless to changes in environmental factors, as well as biological factors. For example they have a much simpler genetic structure than mosquito's for example. Bees as a species don't adapt well to change, relying on mobility, not adaptability, to survive. If a place doesn't suit them, they start a hive somewhere else, running instead of adapting.

Scientists look for ancient Honey bee's in the northern climates signaling the presence of flowering plants as, indicators of past climate change, so it naturally follows that they could be good indicators of present climate changes as well.

  Although it looks likely that bee populations are going to weather through the most recent onslaught, it still makes me wonder if the recent bee population die offs are for telling what global warming may bring.

Modern menu's - set up against health

Menu's of today traditionally use the protein (meat, poultry, fish) as the selling point for any menu item. This creates the feeling that these items are the most important choice in your diet, but if you look at any healthy, environmentally friendly diet this is a mistake. The proteins should be treated like a desert, or special side dish, not as the main thing we eat. The energy to create proteins is environmentally intensive (in cows for example its approximately 7 to 1 ratio of feed to form meat, and compared to total production calories it is as much as 78 to 1). Now I enjoy a good steak as much as anyone, so I am not set against eating meats or fatty food, but I think these should go back to being special or celebratory items, not the mainstays.This is  the way it naturally works whenever resources become scarce and our species is threatened. Unfortunately we have created a non sustainable food production complex which is energy intensive and will collapse when the energy becomes scarce. When this happens many of our fields will be unable to produce crops lacking the energy intensive nitrates that we create. Our feed lots will be unable to sustain the cattle populations that we support today due to lack of ability to grow grains, and our food production systems could fail. I also realize that market forces are eventually take care of tis situation, for when energy begins to cost what it truly does to society, instead of the short sighted price structure that we have now, then meats and proteins will become prohibitively expensive for the daily table. The problem is that many of our fields will be laid to waste, drained of all ability to grow products. I believe if we can get back to a more natural way of eating then we can extend our food supply our many years into the future without the potentially destructive impact of future energy shortages.

    I also agree that it is not this alone that makes an unhealthy diet in America, for in Europe they also create menu's like this, but combined with the huge portion sizes that we seem to expect, it is easy to see why its detrimental to us.

  Our answer is that we create a menu with foundations of grains and vegetables as the base of the menu, and treat the proteins as a special side dish, much as fried food has become in many modern menu's. These foundations are primarily healthy vegetarian choices, which would be suficient for a meal on their own. They would also be less expensive than a traditional meal, which would meet the societal needs of sustainability. The other feature of this diet is that it could switch back to the preparation of whole grains, which at the beginning of the last century was where we got most of our starch calories from. These whole grains are a much more nutritious and balanced source calories, which include essential vitamins and minerals not found in meats. They are also delicious when made properly (I know I was skeptical when I first started doing experiments with them, but I am now converted).

Shameless promotion department: The Bread Workshops new dinner menu blends these ideas with such foundations as a wild mushroom stew, vegetarian chili made with roasted whole wheat berries, a kamut Mediterranean salad.