Patrick Elf speaks with Peter Andrews, sustainability executive at the Food and Drink Federation (FDF), on how to feed people sustainably given the serious and numerous social and environmental challenges we face.
FDF is the voice of the UK food and drinks manufacturing industry, with members such as Mondelez, PepsiCo, Mars and a range of smaller businesses. As the UK’s largest manufacturing sector, the food and drink industry has huge potential for change – but what is it doing to overcome some of the obstacles?
What got you interested about working in sustainability?
It wasn’t a ‘follow the frog‘ moment of quitting my old job and setting off to single-handedly save the rainforest, but rather a growing realisation that I need to be working with businesses to be at the forefront of a shift to a more sustainable approach to development – one that meets shared goals of business growth, social improvements and positive environmental outcomes.
When we talk about sustainability, the list of challenges seems to be infinite. What do you see as the main challenge for the food sector?
Food and drink production is one of the most weather dependent economic activities we have, which means climate change is going to have a major impact on our future ability to produce.
The challenge for our sector is not only mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions to minimise further changes, but also the need to adapt our practices in an uncertain climate and increase food production sustainably. This is vital if we are to feed the predicted nine billion people by 2050.
How does FDF support sustainable development, and how does it ensure that its members are aware of these future challenges?
FDF’s strapline is “Delivering Sustainable Growth”. To us, this means decoupling environmental impacts from economic growth. Our Five-fold Environmental Ambition is a framework of targets for the industry to reduce CO2 emissions, waste and water and optimise packaging and distribution.
We publish guidance to help our members reduce their environmental impacts – so far we’ve cut CO2 emissions by 32% since 1990 – and we work with stakeholders to both ensure the business environment encourages sustainable practices and that future challenges are well prepared for.
With large parts of the developing world suffering from poor diets and even extreme starvation, what does the future of food look like?
The positive news is that by 2030, the population of the world’s middle classes is expected to have more than doubled from 2 billion today to 4.9 billion. This lifting of millions of people out of poverty, mainly in China and India but also sub-Saharan Africa, is extraordinary and unprecedented in this timescale. These people will have the means to live more comfortable lifestyles.
The challenge – and opportunity – for the food industry will be to meet the greater consumption demand that comes with higher levels of affluence.
Will these new middle classes aspire to so-called western diets of more meat and dairy consumption? Will current land availability and technology be sufficient to meet demand? How will the world’s poorest be affected? All of these questions will need to be answered, not just by the food industry, but by governments, international organisations and the scientific community, too.
What ideas or innovations do you think can change or have already changed the food sector for the better?
The food and drink industry is immensely innovative: in the UK we see 6,000-8,000 new products come on to the market each year.
Focus on resource efficiency has led to companies exploring novel solutions to both present and future challenges. For example PepsiCo’s work on extracting water from raw materials (e.g. potatoes) and recycling it for use in factory processes instead of mains water, or Coca-Cola’s PlantBottle that uses bioplastics as an alternative to petroleum-based plastics, or Unilever’s use of biogas from its anaerobic digester to power its boilers and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
With so much going on and so many challenges to face, who or what are the drivers for change in the food sector?
In addition to individual companies, there are many other stakeholders driving change in the food industry, including consumers, investors, government and NGOs. Change is also driven by forces such as population growth, climate change, competition and resource scarcity, to name but a few.
As a trade association, FDF engages with all of these stakeholders on all of these issues and more, helping businesses in our industry to prepare for the challenges ahead. Many of these challenges can only be effectively addressed through multi-stakeholder collaboration and that’s where I feel acknowledgement of a shared goal is immensely powerful.
Peter Andrews is sustainability executive at the Food and Drink Federation.
Photo: Timo Balk via freeimages
Will Self-Driving Cars Be Better for the Environment?
Technologists, engineers, lawmakers, and the general public have been excitedly debating about the merits of self-driving cars for the past several years, as companies like Waymo and Uber race to get the first fully autonomous vehicles on the market. Largely, the concerns have been about safety and ethics; is a self-driving car really capable of eliminating the human errors responsible for the majority of vehicular accidents? And if so, who’s responsible for programming life-or-death decisions, and who’s held liable in the event of an accident?
But while these questions continue being debated, protecting people on an individual level, it’s worth posing a different question: how will self-driving cars impact the environment?
The Big Picture
The Department of Energy attempted to answer this question in clear terms, using scientific research and existing data sets to project the short-term and long-term environmental impact that self-driving vehicles could have. Its findings? The emergence of self-driving vehicles could essentially go either way; it could reduce energy consumption in transportation by as much as 90 percent, or increase it by more than 200 percent.
That’s a margin of error so wide it might as well be a total guess, but there are too many unknown variables to form a solid conclusion. There are many ways autonomous vehicles could influence our energy consumption and environmental impact, and they could go well or poorly, depending on how they’re adopted.
One of the big selling points of autonomous vehicles is their capacity to reduce the total number of vehicles—and human drivers—on the road. If you’re able to carpool to work in a self-driving vehicle, or rely on autonomous public transportation, you’ll spend far less time, money, and energy on your own car. The convenience and efficiency of autonomous vehicles would therefore reduce the total miles driven, and significantly reduce carbon emissions.
There’s a flip side to this argument, however. If autonomous vehicles are far more convenient and less expensive than previous means of travel, it could be an incentive for people to travel more frequently, or drive to more destinations they’d otherwise avoid. In this case, the total miles driven could actually increase with the rise of self-driving cars.
As an added consideration, the increase or decrease in drivers on the road could result in more or fewer vehicle collisions, respectively—especially in the early days of autonomous vehicle adoption, when so many human drivers are still on the road. Car accident injury cases, therefore, would become far more complicated, and the roads could be temporarily less safe.
Deadheading is a term used in trucking and ridesharing to refer to miles driven with an empty load. Assume for a moment that there’s a fleet of self-driving vehicles available to pick people up and carry them to their destinations. It’s a convenient service, but by necessity, these vehicles will spend at least some of their time driving without passengers, whether it’s spent waiting to pick someone up or en route to their location. The increase in miles from deadheading could nullify the potential benefits of people driving fewer total miles, or add to the damage done by their increased mileage.
Make and Model of Car
Much will also depend on the types of cars equipped to be self-driving. For example, Waymo recently launched a wave of self-driving hybrid minivans, capable of getting far better mileage than a gas-only vehicle. If the majority of self-driving cars are electric or hybrids, the environmental impact will be much lower than if they’re converted from existing vehicles. Good emissions ratings are also important here.
On the other hand, the increased demand for autonomous vehicles could put more pressure on factory production, and make older cars obsolete. In that case, the gas mileage savings could be counteracted by the increased environmental impact of factory production.
The Bottom Line
Right now, there are too many unanswered questions to make a confident determination whether self-driving vehicles will help or harm the environment. Will we start driving more, or less? How will they handle dead time? What kind of models are going to be on the road?
Engineers and the general public are in complete control of how this develops in the near future. Hopefully, we’ll be able to see all the safety benefits of having autonomous vehicles on the road, but without any of the extra environmental impact to deal with.
New Zealand to Switch to Fully Renewable Energy by 2035
New Zealand’s prime minister-elect Jacinda Ardern is already taking steps towards reducing the country’s carbon footprint. She signed a coalition deal with NZ First in October, aiming to generate 100% of the country’s energy from renewable sources by 2035.
New Zealand is already one of the greenest countries in the world, sourcing over 80% of its energy for its 4.7 million people from renewable resources like hydroelectric, geothermal and wind. The majority of its electricity comes from hydro-power, which generated 60% of the country’s energy in 2016. Last winter, renewable generation peaked at 93%.
Now, Ardern is taking on the challenge of eliminating New Zealand’s remaining use of fossil fuels. One of the biggest obstacles will be filling in the gap left by hydropower sources during dry conditions. When lake levels drop, the country relies on gas and coal to provide energy. Eliminating fossil fuels will require finding an alternative source to avoid spikes in energy costs during droughts.
Business NZ’s executive director John Carnegie told Bloomberg he believes Ardern needs to balance her goals with affordability, stating, “It’s completely appropriate to have a focus on reducing carbon emissions, but there needs to be an open and transparent public conversation about the policies and how they are delivered.”
The coalition deal outlined a few steps towards achieving this, including investing more in solar, which currently only provides 0.1% of the country’s energy. Ardern’s plans also include switching the electricity grid to renewable energy, investing more funds into rail transport, and switching all government vehicles to green fuel within a decade.
Zero net emissions by 2050
Beyond powering the country’s electricity grid with 100% green energy, Ardern also wants to reach zero net emissions by 2050. This ambitious goal is very much in line with her focus on climate change throughout the course of her campaign. Environmental issues were one of her top priorities from the start, which increased her appeal with young voters and helped her become one of the youngest world leaders at only 37.
Reaching zero net emissions would require overcoming challenging issues like eliminating fossil fuels in vehicles. Ardern hasn’t outlined a plan for reaching this goal, but has suggested creating an independent commission to aid in the transition to a lower carbon economy.
She also set a goal of doubling the number of trees the country plants per year to 100 million, a goal she says is “absolutely achievable” using land that is marginal for farming animals.
Greenpeace New Zealand climate and energy campaigner Amanda Larsson believes that phasing out fossil fuels should be a priority for the new prime minister. She says that in order to reach zero net emissions, Ardern “must prioritize closing down coal, putting a moratorium on new fossil fuel plants, building more wind infrastructure, and opening the playing field for household and community solar.”
A worldwide shift to renewable energy
Addressing climate change is becoming more of a priority around the world and many governments are assessing how they can reduce their reliance on fossil fuels and switch to environmentally-friendly energy sources. Sustainable energy is becoming an increasingly profitable industry, giving companies more of an incentive to invest.
Ardern isn’t alone in her climate concerns, as other prominent world leaders like Justin Trudeau and Emmanuel Macron have made renewable energy a focus of their campaigns. She isn’t the first to set ambitious goals, either. Sweden and Norway share New Zealand’s goal of net zero emissions by 2045 and 2030, respectively.
Scotland already sources more than half of its electricity from renewable sources and aims to fully transition by 2020, while France announced plans in September to stop fossil fuel production by 2040. This would make it the first country to do so, and the first to end the sale of gasoline and diesel vehicles.
Many parts of the world still rely heavily on coal, but if these countries are successful in phasing out fossil fuels and transitioning to renewable resources, it could serve as a turning point. As other world leaders see that switching to sustainable energy is possible – and profitable – it could be the start of a worldwide shift towards environmentally-friendly energy.
- Energy2 weeks ago
How Much Energy Does Bitcoin Use, Really?
- Environment4 weeks ago
Biggest Tip to Eco-Friendly Car Ownership (Which May Surprise You)
- Energy4 weeks ago
Top 5 Changes You can Make in Your Life to Reduce Your Carbon Footprint
- Energy3 weeks ago
4 Energy Efficient Home Upgrades that You Can Install Yourself