Are agroecological and organic farming the same thing?

In the context CFF uses it - yes. However, our scheme is an informal quality assurance that falls outside the EU "organic" labelling regulations. If you want to call your produce "organic" you need to be third party inspected and pay those costs which may be 1400% greater than our starting cost.

I want to become an agroecological grower - where do I start?

As a new organisation we want to bring something new to the table and do not wish to reinvent the wheel. Therefore we signpost best services from our personal experience.

www.organicgrowersalliance.co.uk - best journal, technical advice, website & events

www.stockfreeorganic.net - best international support network for growers

Fir Tree Community Growers - organises regular training in market gardening in North West England

Growing Green - best textbook on market gardening and growing for a market

Garden Organic - best resource on organic vegetable gardening

Love the Garden - all the latest statistics on Grow Your Own with great graphics

Organic Futures - support young people into organic growing

WWOOF - volunteer and workshadow on organic farms to improve your experience

Organic Apprenticeship Scheme - organised by the Soil Association

Organic Conversion Information Service - part of Environmental Stewardship Scheme

Isn't climate change a myth and won't we find more oil?

It is human nature to invest massive resources to preserving the status quo of our consumptive lifestyles. However, climate change is generally accepted as happening within the scientific community. Fossil fuels were fuels formed by prehistoric plants and organisms that were buried and decomposed anaerobically millions of years ago. These fuels contain high percentage of carbon and hydrocarbons that when combusted release energy. Their extraction is expected to reach its peak (peak oil) in the next decade. In industrial countries, more than 90% of greenhouse gas emissions come from the combustion of fossil fuels.

The Permian mass extinction (250 million years ago) was the result of excessive CO2 from volcanoes blanketing the earth. The poles warmed faster than the rest of the planet. This reduced temperature differences between latitudes and caused ocean currents to stall. Without these circulations the depths were deprived of oxygen. Rotting lifeforms in the stagnant oceans belched out hydrogen sulphide, which drifted over land killing 70% of terrestrial vertebrate species. There are parallels to what is happening at present. The poles are warming faster than elsewhere. The Gulf stream is slowing down, meaning that Britain will get more artic winters. Due to complex feedback effects a tipping point of unstoppable climate change might be reached. We all need to embrace change.

How does CFF propose to help the 80% reduction of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) emissions by 2050?

For the UK, we support the land use scenarios in Zero Carbon Britain as the best chance to achieve carbon reduction. This has to be coupled with a worldwide treaty to:

• have honest carbon accounting focused on consumption. The average UK consumption of CO2e is five times what the planet can afford;

• keep remaining fossil fuels in the ground;

• have a worldwide reduction in meat and dairy;

• get more healthy food from arable land (e.g. vegetables and wholefoods) and reduce food waste;

• increase the carbon sequestration of soils and biomass;

• increase energy production from perennial plants grown only on non-arable land – e.g. coppice and energy silage.

Why does CFF only certify agroecological growing practices?

When it comes to carbon footprints it is possible to find references in academic literature to back various positions either to support intensive or extensive agriculture. In the UK, organic and conventional foods often have similar carbon footprints. Whilst organic has less fossil fuel carbon dioxide, the yields are lower (or the age of slaughter is higher) causing more biological greenhouse gases, per kg of food, particularly methane and nitrous oxide. When organic can achieve similar yields to conventional then organic will automatically have a lower carbon footprint. It is generally agreed in academic literature that:

• organic agriculture uses less fossil fuel and therefore is more resilient in the face of peak oil and peak phosphorous;

• field production of potatoes, vegetables, fruit and nuts have low carbon footprints (compared to other food categories) providing that they are not processed, frozen, refrigerated for significant periods or air freighted long distances.

In keeping with DEFRA's Green Claims Code, CFF certifies low-carbon food categories that in academic literature have low carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e) emissions per kg of food. CFF may move towards other parameters e.g. nutritional density per CO2e, once academic data is available and following stakeholder consultation.

What are the issues with high carbon emitting organic foods? 

We regret that, at this time, we cannot certify multi ingredient products, fossil fuel heated protected crops (although general plant raising is permissible) or livestock products. We are not saying that these foods cannot be part of a low-carbon diet, as an occasional addition, but must be massively reduced on current consumption levels.

The position of part of the organic movement may be summed up by a Guardian interview of Helen Browning where she said organic farming is very strong on animal welfare, on biodiversity loss and on providing employment, although she accepts that on carbon intensity the argument is not completely straightforward. There are issues with the impact of her own pig herds on climate. She says that it's more carbon intensive to keep them in outdoor systems, because they use more calories up and have to be fed more. She argues that this is where you have to balance out animal welfare against the environment and make some very difficult decisions. The only answer for her is to eat less meat but of better quality. More info about her carbon audit in the ADAS report page 53.

Why does CFF not support "soil carbon offsets" for high carbon emitting organic foods?

Offsetting may give a false impression that “business as usual” is acceptable. It is argued, for example, that fossil fuel emissions from glasshouse tomatoes or methane emissions from cows can be offset by the carbon sequestration (absorption) of soil and perennial plants. Sequestration happens in both conventional and organic systems. CFF is concerned about the permanence of sequestration and when land use change occurred. Carbon sinks will reach equilibrium and at that point cannot offset GHG emissions. Until academic consensus is reached about sequestration uncertainties, CFF is following a stakeholder consultation which supported separating sequestration from emissions and not putting them together in the same carbon footprint. Many researchers (e.g. Azeez 2009 in the Soil Association's Soil Carbon Report) have discussed the “twenty year effect” where carbon sequestration is greatest from the point of land use change. This is not to say that sequestration doesn't happen after twenty years it is just that it becomes less significant. Accordingly Climate Friendly Food's carbon toolkits (on this website) includes sequestration for twenty years. The same policy has been adopted by the CALM carbon calculator, the UK most widely used carbon calculator for farms.

How can we increase soil carbon annually?

Two thirds of historic CO2 has been from fossil fuels. So is it really possible to put back the carbon we have dug up from the bowels of the earth and place it in the skin? According to American Professor Ratten Lal¹ worldwide we could draw down 50 parts per million CO2 by 2100 by increasing soil and biomass carbon. The potential for sequestration is greatest on degraded soils. We therefore need to:

• restore degraded soils by increasing organic matter levels;

• use crop rotations with deep rooting green manures;

• add composted organic materials including woody, biochar and/or chipped branch wood;

• avoid deep ploughing;

• reduce unnecessary and aggressive cultivations especially destoning, pan-busting and fine soil ridging;

• reduce summer fallows;

• reduce bare soil in winter;

• crop mixes to include more plants that are perennial or have deep-root systems.

How can we increase / protect perennial plants on our holding?

Growing perennial plants increase carbon sequestration in the soil in which they are grown and their standing biomass. Most of the rates are based on a study by Pete Falloon² (with the exception of nuts, fruit and organic amendments). The calculations and presumptions are described in our calculator references sections. The Falloon research has been subject to different interpretations by other researchers. Again in the carbon toolkits on this website sequestration is accounted for twenty years.

• Woodland planted into permanent grass = 10,250kg CO2e per hectare per year

• Woodland planted into cultivated soil = 13,900kg CO2e per hectare per year

• Tree strips planted into permanent grass = 2.05kgCO2e per metre per year (presumption 2m wide)
  

• Trees planted into cultivated soil = 2.78kg CO2e per metre per year (presumption 2m wide)

• Individual trees planted into permanent grass = 111.41kg CO2e each per year

• Individual trees planted into cultivated soil = 151.09kg CO2e each per year

• Orchards sequestration potential = 3300kg CO2e/ha/year

• Nuts groves sequestration potential 5520kg CO2e/ha/year

• Hedgerows planted into permanent grass = 0.733kg CO2e per metre per year (presumption 2m wide)

• Hedgerows planted into cultivated soil = 1.49kg CO2e per metre per year (presumption 2m wide)

• Cultivated to uncultivated grassland or grass margins

• Sequestration potential per metre square = 0.4kg CO2e per year

• Sequestration potential per hectare = 4037kg CO2e per year

• Cultivated agrochemical to cultivated organic matter additions

• Sequestration potential per hectare = 500kg CO2e per year

Perennial plants can be planted in traditional farm boundaries, alley cropping (tree lines) or more complex forest garden arrangements.

What are the carbon benefits of agroforestry?

Mature tree crops, like an apple, represent the ultimate in low-carbon food systems since they have a high calorific output per hectare, can be managed and harvested with non-powered hand tools and their produce can be sold from the farmgate without any washing, processing or refrigeration. Growing multi-storey perennials in a “forest garden” arrangment has great potential for yield and carbon sequestion because the above ground biomass carbon and as the soil is never cultivated and the symbiotic relationship of perennial crop roots to mycorrhizal fungi. The crop provides the fungi with sugars (i.e. carbon) and in return receives enhanced mineral and water uptake via the extensive hyphal network of the fungi, which acts as an extension of the crops own root system³. A major portion of humus i.e. stable carbon has been identified as the glycoproteins produced by the hypae of mycorrhizal fungi It has been suggested that mycorrhizal fungi largely control the stabilisation of root-derived carbon in the soil⁴. For more information on agroforestry visit www.agroforestry.co.uk

In the future will carbon sequestration become more important than growing food?

Putting emissions and sequestration together gives a perverse carbon incentive to not grow food at all. This could happen in a future of carbon trading where a farmer may get more money from leaving his farm uncultivated or worse growing annual biofuels. It is important to look beyond the individual farm and see at the macro/global level there is an “opportunity cost”. For example by refusing to grow our own food in the UK we are pushing the consequences of our high carbon consumption onto ghost acres where we plunder the food resources of the world's poor and destroy pristine habitats. By focusing on home-production in the UK and reducing imports, CFF believes that this complements the “consumption focus” of carbon accounting that will support the movement towards relocalised and independent food systems.

What is closed-fertility?

See the Closed-fertility policy briefing for a more detailed explanation. We encourage holdings to be self-sufficient in

• Carbon from photosynthesis in the form of green manures or composted organic materials

• Nitrogen from N-fixing green manures like clover

• Address the issues of peak phosphate

We accept that urban and peri-urban growers (on intensive horticultural units) will need access to societal organic wastes and those wastes must be used more strategically. The Soil Association's Peak Phosphorus report has argued for the use of human sewage (which no longer has the heavy metal contaminant problems it once had) and CFF supports this position.

What's the problem with deep ploughing?

Ploughing can cause the development of plough-pans, soil compaction, is detrimental to the vertical burrowing of earthworms and damages the stratified layers of soil life that develops in an undisturbed soil. There has been a steady increase in ploughing depth with modern machinery from the traditional 4-6 inches to typically 8-9 inches. There has also been an increase in the intensity of soil cultivation with destoning, pan-removal and fine ridging increasing the amount of soil organic matter that is exposed to air and therefore carbon that is oxidised from the soil into the atmosphere. Whilst in organic growing systems ploughing may be necessary to bury green material and weeds, it is better to keep this shallow and break any compaction pans with the long-term use of deep rooting green manures.

Why must we stop our compost heaps going anaerobic?

Lundie & Peters⁵ investigated home composting in aerobic or anaerobic  (aireless and wet) conditions. In aerobic conditions when oxygen is present only carbon dioxide is released. However, in anaerobic conditions the more potent methane and nitrous oxides are released. Therefore one tonne of aerobic home-made compost releases 3.9kg CO2e whereas one tonne of anaerobic (airless and smelly) compost releases a three hundred and eighty five times increase at 1502kg CO2e. Consult the textbook Growing Green for best small-scale composting practice.

What are the easy steps we can take to reduce nitrous oxide (silver award)?

See the Nitrous Oxide (N20) briefing sheet for more detailed explanation. N2O is a greenhouse gas that is 310 times more potent that carbon dioxide and N2O also destroys the stratospheric ozone.

• Incorporate main fertility inputs - green manure / grass leys, compost, mulch and manure in spring.

• Avoid incorporating fertilisers into warm, wet soils.

• Allow aerobic decomposition of incorporated green material

• Work the material through the soil profile rather than burying large quantities of green material which will create anaerobic (airless) zones e.g. disk before ploughing.
  

• Use over winter cover crops and green manures.

• Avoid bare soil in winter.

• Restrict tillage operations to cool and dry conditions.

• Reduce wet soil compaction.

What are the next steps we can take to reduce nitrous oxide (gold award)?

• Grow at least 50% grass in legumious green manure leys (over 12 months old)

• Remove mown green manures and grass leys for composting and / or anaerobic digestion

• Add a high lignin organic amendment (e.g. woody well-rotted greenwaste compost, leafmould, chipped branch wood, biochar) to green manure leys

What's the problem with extracted peat in our seedling compost?

Prior to the 1970s most growers relied on loam-based seedling mixes. But they were heavy and expensive to transport. Then lightweight peat products overtook the market. Peat is made of semi-decomposed plant debris that's formed over thousands of years in layers of about 1mm a year in the waterlogged, oxygen-starved, acidic conditions found in bogs both in the UK and around the world. Once extracted, this rich, dark stuff holds both water, air and plant nutrients well. However, the UK's peat addiction is destroying valuable habitats for all kinds of rare plants and animals. Much peat is now imported from the Eastern bloc but the extraction from British bogs releases the equivalent carbon emissions from around 100,000 households. The destruction of peat bogs is as significant as the destruction of tropical rainforests in terms of climate change. 

DEFRA have declared that they want to reduce peat use to zero by 2030, setting the following milestones:

• progressive phase-out target of 2015 for public sector procurement of peat in new contracts for plants
• voluntary phase-out target of 2020 for amateur gardeners
• final voluntary phase-out target of 2030 for professional growers

Why should we avoid cultivating peat soils (histastols) e.g. fen and moss?

Cultivated peat soils decompose at the rate of 1 to 2 centimetres per year. This means that one hectare of cultivated thick peat (over 1 metre deep) looses a staggering 47 tonnes CO2e each year⁶.

Why should we move from fossil fuel to ethical biofuel in our machinery?

The fossil fuel that you will typically use are: diesel, petrol, heating oil, propane, butane, natural gas, LPG and coal. Fossil fuels were fuels formed by prehistoric plants and organisms that were buried and decomposed anaerobically millions of years ago. These fuels contain high percentage of carbon and hydrocarbons that when combusted release energy. In industrial countries, more than 90% of greenhouse gas emissions come from the combustion of fossil fuels.

Our only option is to keep the remaining fossil fuels in the ground by finding alternatives for our machines that take into account the need to preserve habitats and feed world populations. CFF defines ethical biofuel as those from renewable biological processes that should be able to continue indefinitely. This includes steam (from wood), biogas (from organic wastes, energy silage and non-factory farmed agricultural waste) and used vegetable oil (typically used in catering). We also recognise electric vehicles, human powered machinery e.g. bikes and grass-fed equine. With the exception of used vegetable oil all of these should be the product of more marginal land (in the UK from grade 3 onwards) or byproduct of arable fertility building, so that they do not displace arable land needed to feed rising world populations.

What's the problem with new machinery?

The issue with new machinery is that primary material production, particularly of metals, is very fossil fuel intensive in its manufacture. In Climate Friendly Food's carbon toolkits on this website we account for new machinery up to ten years old using straight line depreciation.

Does recycling reduce or increase carbon emissions?

Recycling has both positive and negative effects on carbon emissions. Recycling reduces emissions by:

• reducing the need for raw materials which generally require more energy to produce and transport than recycled materials;

• reducing waste in landfill and consequent methane emissions although some types of recycled materials do not produce methane and landfill methane is controlled in the UK.

Recycling increases emissions because of the transportation and processing of the materials. Consequently, the waste hierarchy favours waste minimisation and waste reuse over recycling. However, recycling is more carbon efficient than landfilling or incinerating waste. The Government's Waste Strategy for England (2007) reported that “current UK recycling of paper, glass, plastics, aluminium and steel is estimated to save more than 18 million tonnes of carbon dioxide a year through avoided primary material production.”

What renewable energy can we generate?

See Generating Energy briefing for a more detailed explanation. Consider:

• Wind turbines

• Photovoltaics

• Solar thermal

• Combined Heat & Power

• Steam

• Biomass – micanthus, short rotation coppice, short rotation forestry, wood chip / pellet boilers

• Anaerobic digestion – energy silage and waste

• Ground source heat pumps

• Air source heat pumps

• Micro hydro power – Pelton turbine, Archimedian Screw

Why should we use renewable energy tariffs for our electricity and gas?

If you are not in a position to produce your own renewable energy please consider renewable tariffs.

• www.ecotricity.co.uk (electricity and biogas)
  

• www.goodenergy.co.uk

• www.greenenergy.uk.com

At the time of writing the position with DEFRA and DECC that as these forms of electricity are delivered through the National Grid that in accounting terms they should represent the same CO2ekg emissions as non-renewable electricity. We have taken the policy decision to allow a 15% reduction for partial renewable tariff and 50% reduction for full renewable tariff in our “gardener” and “grower/retailer” carbon calculator. This may be subject to review in the future.

How can we reduce the effects of transportation and refrigeration?

With field grown produce that is sold unprocessed refrigeration and transportation become the most significant carbon emissions from the life cycle. Much of this information here is taken from Tara Garnett's (2006) Fruit & Vegetables & UK Greenhouse gas emissions⁷.

Consumption of fruit and vegetables accounts for around 2.5% of the UK’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Trends suggest that consumer demand for the more greenhouse gas intensive fruits and vegetables is growing. As 90% of fruit and 40% of vegetables are imported into the UK, the time for change is upon us. Fruit and vegetables have come under particular scrutiny in the food miles debate; the air-freighted Kenyan dwarf bean and Californian strawberry appear now to have acquired celebrity-villain status. Perishable produce is more likely to be air freighted than produce which is not. Air freight is an area of particular concern. Around 1.5% of imported fruits and vegetables travel by air but this 1.5% accounts for around half of all emissions associated with fruit and vegetable transport, excluding travel to the shops. The air freight sector is also growing by 6% per year.

A useful marker for the energy intensity of a particular fruit or vegetable is its fragility and perishability. Produce that is fragile and perishable tends to be easily spoiled, hence waste and wasted emissions are a problem. Fragile perishable produce also tends to require energy-intensive storage at low temperatures in order to minimise the decay process. Third, in order to minimise the time taken between point of harvest and point of retail, rapid modes of transport, often over long distances, are necessary.

Mobile temperature controlled storage tends to be significantly less energy efficient than stationary cold storage. The reason for this is simple – a smaller container such as a mobile refrigeration unit has a larger surface area relative to the volume it can hold than a large cold store and it is not possible to insulate it to the same degree. The US Steel Recycling Institute (SRI)⁸ estimates refrigeration to add an extra 14% on top of transport energy and as units are sold internationally this is likely to apply in the UK. Light good vehicles (LGV) i.e. refrigerated vans contribute significantly to GHG emissions.

LGV do not need to be refrigerated to cause proportionally high carbon emissions⁹ as the national organic box scheme Riverford found in comparison to its packing and heavy good vehicle processes.

See the Refrigeration Policy briefing for a more detailed explanation of on-farm refrigeration again based on the work of Riverford.

Why does CFF support independent and co-operative retailing?

We support the ideas of community-led trade which means independent and co-operative retailing. These should be better at delivering lower carbon footprints on the basis of the Schumacher Principle that Small is Beautiful...

small scale operations, no matter how numerous, are always less likely to be harmful to the natural environment than large scale ones, simply because their individual force is small in relations to the recuperative forces of nature.

Independent and co-operative retailers are traditionally more tolerant and adventurous and therefore have a higher marketable yield.

 

Indicator	Pre-pack	Wholesale	Independent and co-operative
Marketable yield	Lowest (50-70%)	Medium/high (70-85%)	High (90-95%)
Grade out	30 - 50%	15 - 20%	5 – 10%
EC Class	Class I (& II)	Class II	Class I & II
Crop range	Limited range	Medium range	High diversity with over 50 vegetables

The independent greengrocers tend to have lower carbon emissions per metre square of shop space. The average greengrocer is 105kg CO2/m2/year whereas a supermarket is over three times higher at 330kg CO2/m2/year¹. This also indicates that where produce is sold direct from the farm without storage or refrigeration, as in the case of a box scheme, the carbon savings are huge.

Does crop waste cause carbon emissions?

Waste is highly significant since food that is produced but not eaten represents a waste of the energy used in its production, processing and distribution. Around 25% of all harvested fruits and vegetables are never consumed and this is a particular problem in the catering sector. One UK study calculates² that nearly 9 million tonnes of food (of all types) are discarded as waste each year. To this should also be added the 1 million tonnes of vegetable residues³ that are left in the field a byproduct of globalised procurement policy. Much waste, particularly at the field and the retail stages, may occur as a result of societal definitions of ‘quality.’ Stringent supermarket standards governing size and appearance means that much edible produce is simply rejected. Consumers in turn reject produce in store which does not appear to be perfect, as they see it. It appears that supermarkets and consumers together ratchet up ‘quality’ standards beyond levels required to safeguard nutritional content or food safety.

 

1Lal R (2009) International Food Policy Research Institute briefing for Copenhagen – The potential for soil carbon sequestration www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/focus16_05.pdf

2Falloon P et al (2004) Managing field margins for biodiversity and carbon sequestration. Soil Use and Management 20, 240-247

3Hepperly et al (2008) Carbon sequestration in organic maize / soybean cropping systems. Paper of the 16^th IFOAM World Congress, Modena, Italy, June 16-20.

4Cited to Hole (2005) in the Soil Carbon Report but unable to find exact reference.

5 Lundie, S. & Peters, G. M. (2005) Life cycle assessment of food waste management options. Journal of Cleaner Production 13 (2005) 275-286

6 UK Greenhouse Gas Inventory, 1990 to 2006: Annual Report for submission under the Framework Convention on Climate Change: Annexes. Choudrie SL, Jackson J, Watterson JD, Murrells T, Passant N, Thomson A, Cardenas L, Leech A, Mobbs DC, Thistlethwaite G http://www.naei.org.uk/report_link.php?report_id=507

7Garnett T (2006) Fruit & Vegetables & UK Greenhouse gas emissions. Exploring the Relationship. Working paper produced as part of the Food Climate Research Network, 

8Ritchie K (2006) from farm to plate. An energy consumption assessment of refrigerated, frozen and canned food delivery. On behalf of Steel Recycling Institute.