Which floret of broccoli would you choose?

Transcription

1 Which floret of broccoli would you choose? Thomas Angervall Britta Florén Friederike Ziegler November 2006 A study carried out by SIK for the Stockholm Consumer Co-operative Society. For more information: Louise Ungerth, Head of Consumer Affairs, tel. +46(0) , +46(0) Ulrika Lamberth, Public Relations Officer, tel. +46(0) , +46(0)

2 SUMMARY This is a summary of a study carried out by SIK for the Stockholm Consumer Co-operative Society. SIK, the Swedish Institute for Food and Biotechnology, in Gothenburg, carries out strategic and applied research within the field of food. OBJECTIVES The objective of this inventory is to study what the environmental and economic consequences would be if all broccoli that is consumed in Sweden were to be cultivated in Sweden instead of, as is the situation today, being largely imported, and in particular whether differences in the conditions for the production of broccoli in Sweden, Spain and Ecuador, particularly with regard to resource consumption and costs, could outweigh the long-distance transport associated with imported broccoli. IMPLEMENTATION AND METHODOLOGY A brief description of broccoli cultivation in the three countries is presented below: Sweden In Sweden, broccoli is currently only cultivated for fresh consumption. The cultivation process makes extensive use of tractors for planting and processing. Broccoli can be cultivated from early planting in April until the frost arrives in the autumn, in October or November. A harvesting time of approximately 75 days from planting to harvesting means that two harvests per season are possible. However, as crop rotation is applied, it is not feasible to replant broccoli on the same land during the same season due to problems with clubroot. Irrigation takes place throughout the cultivation period. The broccoli is harvested by hand with a harvest of 16 tonnes of broccoli heads/ha (FAO 2006). Harvest loss due to size, quality, etc. is currently 30% (according to the Swedish producer). Ignoring this loss, the harvest would therefore be almost 23 tonnes/ha. The assumption that losses in connection with production for frozen florets would fall from 30% to 15% (according to the Swedish producer) results in the use of a harvest of 19.4 tonnes of broccoli heads, corresponding to 11.6 tonnes of florets/ha. The processing of florets is assumed to take place mechanically as in Spain. The transport of fresh broccoli within Sweden takes place by lorry. Spain Spain is the world s largest exporter, and the third largest producer of broccoli in the world (FAO 2006). The area of agricultural land that is used to cultivate broccoli is 26,500 ha. Much of this land is situated in dry areas in southern Spain, where artificial irrigation is necessary. Tractors are used, although to a lesser extent than in Sweden. The harvest is 18.8 tonnes of broccoli heads/ha (FAO 2006), which corresponds to 11.3 tonnes of florets/ha, and the processing of frozen florets takes place mechanically. Ecuador Broccoli is cultivated in Ecuador at high altitudes ( m above sea level) exclusively for export (to the USA, Japan and Europe). The climate and length of the day vary little over the year and there is plenty of natural precipitation, hence the need for irrigation is limited. It 2

3 takes four months from sowing to harvesting, and the steady climate means that cultivation and harvesting can take place continually throughout the year. However, it is not possible to cultivate broccoli more than once a year on the same land. The harvest is 7.8 tonnes of heads/ha, corresponding to 4.7 tonnes of florets/ha. The agriculture is considerably less mechanised, and virtually all work is carried out manually. The climate and high altitude make the broccoli firmer and give it a deep green colour, so improving the quality, according to the importer. The harvesting and cutting of florets is carried out manually and the broccoli is transported after freezing by container ship to Europe. The trade is covered by a free trade agreement between the EU and Ecuador (with other countries in Latin America). Functional unit The products being studied are 1kg of frozen florets cultivated in Ecuador, Spain and Sweden. As there is currently no such production in Sweden, the latter case is based on the production of frozen broccoli and the assumption of a yield (15% harvest loss due to incorrect size or inferior quality instead of, as at present, 30%), processing into florets and freezing have then been added. The yield from broccoli heads to florets is in all cases 60% in weight (Fuentes and Carlsson-Kanyama 2006). In all three cases, consumption is assumed to take place in Stockholm and transport to Stockholm has therefore been included. Electricity generation in the three countries The environmental impact from electricity consumption differs in Sweden, Spain and Ecuador. This is because electricity can be generated in many different ways and the mix of electricity sources varies geographically. Spain has a high proportion of electricity that is based on the fossil fuels coal, oil and gas. The consumption of electricity in Spain therefore gives rise to a greater contribution not only to the greenhouse effect in particular, but also to acidification and over-fertilization in connection with the combustion of these fuels. Sweden s high proportion of nuclear power does not give rise to such large atmospheric emissions, but the problems instead relate to the handling of radioactive waste and to some extent also the impact on biological diversity as a result of the use of hydroelectric power. Table 1. Percentage distribution of electricity generation in the relevant countries (IEA). Energy source Sweden Spain Ecuador Coal, Oil, Gas 6% 53% 38% Biomass, Waste 4% 1% Nuclear power 50% 24% Hydroelectric 39% 17% 62% Other 1% 5% Transport Swedish broccoli is transported from Åhus to Stockholm (603km) by lorry. Spanish broccoli is transported to Stockholm (average of 3250km) by lorry. 3

4 Ecuadorian broccoli is transported by container vessel from Guayaquil to Rotterdam (5682 nautical miles = 10523km), where it is loaded onto a feeder vessel and transported to (489 nautical miles = 906km). From Gothenburg to Stockholm, the broccoli is transported by lorry (476km) The transport distance for the Ecuadorian broccoli is therefore twenty times greater than for Swedish broccoli. Spanish broccoli is transported 5.4 times further than Swedish broccoli. An additional energy consumption of 10% as a result of the broccoli being frozen during transport has been added. The environmental impact From an environmental perspective, both the fuel consumption during cultivation and the intercontinental transport by sea is overshadowed by the long road transport from Spain. As regards the greenhouse effect, Swedish production is considerably less than for the alternatives, which means that diesel consumption in Swedish agriculture is less important than transport by ship and lorry; see Figures 1a and 1b. Per tonne-km, transport by ship is less resource-intensive than transport by lorry. This is the explanation behind the dominance of the Spanish broccoli, despite the transport distance for Latin American broccoli being far greater. Figure 1a. Contribution to the greenhouse effect for cultivation in the three countries with transport to Stockholm (per kg florets). GWP (kg CO2 equivalents/kg florets) Ecuador Spain Sweden 4

5 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Ecuador Spain Sweden Transport Fertilizer Electricity (cultivation + process) Fuel during cultivation Figure 1 b Distribution of the greenhouse effect between the most important stages in the life-cycle CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION According to the FAO (2006), 1.01kg of cauliflower and broccoli is consumed in Sweden per person and year. We assume that the vast majority of this consists of broccoli and that the per capita consumption is therefore 1kg. This means that approx tonnes of broccoli are consumed in Sweden. Of this, approximately 1% is currently cultivated in Sweden, 33% in Southern Europe and 66 % in Latin America, according to the importer s estimates. Based on our results, this broccoli consumption generates emissions of 12,400 tonnes of CO 2 equivalents and has a production cost of almost SEK 40 million; see Table 3 and Figures 3 and 4. Scenario 1. Production exclusively in Sweden: If all cultivation took place in Sweden instead, CO 2 emissions would be 4700 tonnes of CO 2 equivalents and the production costs would be SEK 85 million. In other words, switching from 1%, 33%, and 66% production in Sweden, Spain and Ecuador respectively to 100% production in Sweden would lead to a reduction in GWP (Global Warming Potential, i.e. contribution to the greenhouse effect) of 62 % and almost double the production costs; see Table 3 and Figures 3 and 4. Scenario 2. Production exclusively in Spain: If all cultivation took place in Spain, CO 2 emissions would rise insignificantly and production costs would increase to SEK 51 million. The increase in the contribution to the greenhouse effect is due to the long transport distance by lorry and electricity generation which contributes to large quantities of carbon dioxide. This scenario would lead to insignificant changes in GWP and a 28% increase in production costs; see Table 3 and Figures 3 and 4. 5

6 Scenario 3. Production exclusively in Ecuador: If all cultivation took place in Ecuador, CO 2 emissions would rise insignificantly. The cost would however fall by approximately 85% to SEK 5.9 million (see Table 3 and Figures 3 and 4). Table 3. Results of calculations for scenarios where the current cultivation system for broccoli that is consumed in Sweden is altered from 1% in Sweden, 66% in Ecuador and 33% in Europe to 100% cultivated in Sweden, Ecuador and Spain respectively. Aspect today Sweden Ecuador Spain GWP (kg CO 2 equivalents) GWP change relative to today Production cost (MSEK) Cost change relative to today % lower 0.6% % 85% lower 0.6% 28% 2 GWP (tonnes CO2 equivalents) GWP today GWP Sweden GWP Ecuador GWP Spain Figure 3. Contribution to the greenhouse effect with 1% cultivation in Sweden, 66% in Ecuador and 33% in Spain ( today ) and with 100% cultivation in Sweden, Ecuador and Spain. 6

7 Cost (MSEK) Cost today Cost Sweden Cost Ecuador Cost Spain Figure 4. Production cost with 1% cultivation in Sweden, 66% in Ecuador and 33% in Spain ( today ) and with 100% cultivation in Sweden, Ecuador and Spain respectively. 7