(This article was published by The Tribune on 24 March 2010)
‘Green Revolution’ was a phenomenon that dominated the developing countries since 1950s. As it was associated with increased food production which was believed to be the saviour of the world’s poor and hungry, not many people challenged its sustainability. Was it due to new inventions of crop varieties, chemical pesticides and fertilisers; or was there something else more fundamental that caused this boost in agricultural production?
Agriculture, like any other production process needs a certain amount of energy input to produce something more useful as output. One of the major portions of farm energy input has always been available in the form of solar energy. This is consumed by plants using their photosynthesis capabilities and the rest of the input was filled in by animal/human energy in the shape of their physical labour. That model wasn’t capable to feed 7 billion humans presently inhabiting this planet but nonetheless, it was sustainable. Sustainable system is one which over its lifetime produces enough energy to maintain, grow and reproduce itself.
Then with the availability of relatively cheap fossil fuels (hydro-carbons) and the farm machinery that runs on these fuels, the farmers were more than happy to switch to this new ‘Green Revolutionary’ system of non-renewable-energy intensive farming. This new model made farmers totally dependant on ever increasing energy consumption thus increasing fossil fuel content of our food chain. Fossil fuel (Oil) is simply the solar energy stored as hydro-carbon deposits under the crust of earth over a period of millions of years.
There are two factors worth mentioning here about the fossil fuels. Firstly, fossil fuel reserves are of limited quantity due to the fact that they can only exist at a certain temperature and pressure hence found only up to a certain depth under earth’s surface. Secondly, they don’t exist everywhere. Mother Nature did not distribute its resources evenly. She gave oil to Saudis but didn’t provide them with good soil or water. To Punjabis, she bestowed good soil and water but no oil. May be she thought it would be too humdrum if everybody was treated alike.
Farmers are mostly aware of the visible energy inputs in the form of diesel consumed by tractors or electricity consumed by irrigation motors. Beside this, a huge quantity of invisible energy is consumed to manufacture other farm inputs. Consider tractor for instance; right from the time of mining iron ore, making steel, shipping steel, transporting thousands of factory workers to manufacture a few hundred different parts in dozens of different cities, assembling and shipping a working tractor. All this happens well before the machine enters the fields.
The energy cycle is visible only when you start your tractor for actual ploughing, sowing, harvesting and transportation of the farm produce to the markets. Invisible energy cycle starts again when the farm produce is sent to the storage, processing and packaging to be shipped to the end users across the country or even overseas. Other farm inputs such as fertilisers and pesticides have energy cycles of their own. Pumping irrigation water either by diesel engines or electricity produced by coal power plants adds another substantial hydro-carbon foot-print.
Total solar energy received on a daily basis by our planet sets a limit to maximum photosynthesis capacity and thus set the maximum amount of food that can be produced sustainably. The only other way to increase production is to use stored solar energy in the form of fossil fuels.
If we want to continue practicing agriculture for centuries to come, also known as Permaculture, then we better understand the energy cycle, the soil nutrient cycle and the water cycle of the current model of agricultural practices. Are we consuming more energy than we are producing in the form of food crops? Are we returning everything produced on our land back to it? Are we consuming water faster than what is being replaced by Nature?
To answers these questions, one doesn't need a degree from a university. Put these questions to any number of farmers and almost all of them will make out the correct answers. They all know that soil nutrients are being depleted and only partially replaced by petroleum based fertilisers; ground water level is dropping in most locations. What they don’t know or don’t want to discuss is whether this fossil fuel based farming system is sustainable or not?
It is such a daunting thought that majority of us does not want to recognize the problem or even discuss it. Some of us acknowledge the problem but hope that someone else will invent a solution. The public discussion on this topic is certainly absent. What a dangerous fantasy.
The current model of agriculture is severely dependant on adding a huge amount of non-renewable and mostly imported energy in the form of diesel, petrol and gas. As we have consumed more than half of the hydro-carbon stock from the ground in the last century alone, oil and gas are set to deplete within our lifetime. Since we are fast heading to a post-carbon age, consequently the cost of hydro-carbons will increase many fold in the near future. This will have a multiplier effect on the production costs and prices of all food items.
No matter which political party you belong to and no matter how many Andolans or Morchas you put together, you can’t run away from this simple mathematical correlation. We can blindly carry on this path of maintaining or even increasing the agricultural production by tapping the remaining stockpile of fossil fuels until we finish it. Then what? Imagine for a moment, agriculture without fossil fuels. Can a farmer plough, sow, harvest, process and transport wheat or rice crop on a mere 10 Acre land? It is very intimidating for present day farmers to think this scenario but it should also send forewarning to population that rely on surplus production by farming community.
It would be naïve to think that government will do something to fix this. Their prime job is to keep the things as usual, at least till the next elections. It is guaranteed to maintain the status quo, especially if the proposed changes can cause decrease in production, consumption and therefore result in reduced tax revenues. Which section of population is likely to pay the price for this readjustment? Politicians might lose their hungry voters but they can switch sides, some government officials may lose their jobs but they might find a real productive work elsewhere. Ultimately, it will be the farming community that will face the brunt by losing their livelihood. They can’t leave their land and go elsewhere.
Farmers are the one who have no option but to change their operations from mechanised to localise organic farming. But how can we change the system if we can’t even perceive the problem? Like any other grass root movement you might have a small group to start with new way of thinking. Get on with localise farming practices and even start a local trade based on barter system and slowly become fully self-sufficient. Not depending on cheap fossil fuels and any sort of government help. The ultimate achievement for any village community would be to establish an Eco-Village; a complete self sustaining unit. All this might find resistance from the establishment; after all we are talking about Agrarian Reforms.
Most of us can’t handle too much reality and it is devastating when age old traditions shatter for whatever reason. At the same time, if you are not a scientist or a government official, you may have retained the ability to see things in a simple way. We can’t see the predicament of the current farming model and its imminent collapse unless we understand the short life span of fossil fuels and move away from intensive mechanised farming practices that solely rely on it. We can plan ahead now and try for relatively smooth transition or wait for oil to run out at some point in the near future and everything will change for us without seeking our advice. It is a harsh view but there is no easy way out.
