Posts
Technical Characteristics -- Boeing 747-400ER
Passengers
Typical 3-class configuration 416
Maximum Fuel Capacity** 63,705 U.S. gal (241,140 L)
Maximum Range 7,670 nautical miles (14,205 km)
New York to Hong Kong Range Map
As can be seen in the range map, a trip from New York to Hong Kong would use up most of the fuel.
That's about 150 gallons of fuel per passenger. Let's also assume the passengers wish to come back home. That's another 150 gallons of fuel per passenger.
I guess there's a reason airlines are back in the dumpster again.
So how does this relate to food? One wonders how many calories of food 300 gallons of fuel might produce. I would assume that jet fuel has more energy (per gallon to be burned) than gasoline but let's say it is the same for the sake of argument. We're just doing crude back of envelope calculations anyway.
Bicycling Wastes Gas?
0.0015 gallons of fossil energy per lb. of potatoes
When I spoke with Dr. Pimentel by telephone on April 8 to confirm my calculation above he said that I should double my result to include fossil-based fertilizers, so let's call it 0.0030 gallons.
Let's assume that math is correct. I don't see any glaring errors in the theory anyway. 300 gallons of fossil fuel is therefore enough to produce 100,000 pounds of potatoes.
Now let's summarize and simplify. One round trip ticket from New York to Hong Kong uses up roughly the energy equivalent of producing 50 tons of potatoes. Let me say that once again for dramatic effect: FIFTY TONS OF POTATOES.
Let them eat dirt?
With food prices up as much as 45 per cent since the end of 2006, El Salvador's poor eat about half as much food as they did a year ago. In Haiti, a destitute population is turning increasingly to mud patties made of dirt, oil and sugar, which at least quieten the stomach.
Is it any wonder the poorest among us are starting to get more than a bit upset?
This post was inspired by a comment from MAB who pointed out the mud diet to me.
Real Estate Newsletter Articles this Week: Existing-Home Sales Increased to
4.15 million SAAR in November
-
At the Calculated Risk Real Estate Newsletter this week:
[image: Existing Home Sales]*Click on graph for larger image.*
• NAR: Existing-Home Sales Increase...
11 hours ago
8 comments:
Is fuel the limiting factor in potato production? I thought it was acres-in-cultivation.
- jus me
jus me,
Land is clearly a limiting factor but unfortunately so is fuel.
All About: Food and fossil fuels
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/03/16/eco.food.miles/
To feed an average family of four in the developed world uses up the equivalent of 930 gallons of gasoline a year -- just shy of the 1,070 gallons that same family would use up each year to power their cars.
Well, the 930 gallons is for a developed world family. Which probably has enough potatoes.
If one 747 didn't make the round trip, would we have more potatoes (or rice?) Would any of the newly created rice/potatoes be available where most needed?
The "tons-of-potatoes"/"passenger-mile" is a very thought provoking metric.
I'm just trying to figure out which thoughts to provoke ;)
-jus me
For some reason, I am reminded of Irish grain exports during the potato famine.
http://www.historyplace.com/worldhistory/famine/hunger.htm
El Salvador exports a lot of bananas (& coffee), yet they're a bit short on staples. (hopefully temporarily).
'course this makes sense if you can get more $ for coffee than rice on a given hectare. If you use the $ to import rice, you can get more rice growing coffee than you would growing rice.
Whether in practice it works that way or not, I don't know.
-jus me
jus me,
If one 747 didn't make the round trip, would we have more potatoes (or rice?) Would any of the newly created rice/potatoes be available where most needed?
I actually think it would help (and especially help those who need it the most). In my opinion, we're currently in the self-fulfilling prophecy part of the cycle. People are coming to expect higher food and oil prices. That's a very dangerous place to be (causes hoarding behavior if nothing else, not that I'm morally above it). Falling oil demand could help put a stop to the cycle before it is too late.
I'm just trying to figure out which thoughts to provoke ;)
You and me both. Obviously the tons of potatoes per passenger mile is an extreme example in an attempt to make a point and/or provoke thoughts.
Part of my thinking is based on how food and energy are often lumped together. Maybe I just watched the Road Warrior movie too many times. There was a distinct lack of both.
Thanks for your comments!
jus me,
http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/worldhis.html
In 1846 (during the potato famine) there were approximately 1.3 billion people. We now have approximately 6.6 billion people.
It has been a long time since we've had a serious food crisis. Billions of people rely on cheap rice for their food. It has already skyrocketed in price. Now we're seeing...
The price of rice will rise
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/04/23/opinion/edbowring.php
That's a rather scary headline in many ways. Even if it isn't true, it plants inflation expectations higher.
food and energy are often lumped together
It's possible to grow food (potatoes, what have you) without any fuel at all. Easy on a small scale. Tough for a large operation.
As you point out, increased population requires increased yields; fuels have helped with yields.
Plus, fuel-based cheap transport have decreased local self-sufficiency -- the salvadoran farmer grows coffee, sold in New York, and imports grains from the midwest. Globalization has worked (somewhat) well up to now; salvadorans may be broke but they are not starving.
I am not sure it's time to junk the international flights yet; they're still part of the infrastructure that (still) keeps food & goods flowing.
That "lost" 50 tons of potatoes would still need to be transported...i think...if it's to go from a high-potato-yield area to a high-potato-demand area.
i dunno. My guess is this time, as per usual,
high food prices-> more land in production-> higher food output-> lower food price
OTOH, if peak oil is for real, maybe flying that jet reduces potato output for good. (since the oil is irrecoverable once burned). If so, making that 50 tons of potatoes is also a one-shot deal!! Use oil to make high-yield food, & as we run out of oil, we still run out of food!
So we may end up needed to make food without (so much) fuel, 747s or no.
i sure don't know the answer
-jus me
jus me,
OTOH, if peak oil is for real, maybe flying that jet reduces potato output for good. (since the oil is irrecoverable once burned). If so, making that 50 tons of potatoes is also a one-shot deal!! Use oil to make high-yield food, & as we run out of oil, we still run out of food!
That's a good point. In fact, in your scenario it would probably be better to run out of oil sooner than later. For example, had we run out of oil the day after we first found it we wouldn't really care right now, would we? Of course, in theory there would be far fewer of us (which also probably wouldn't really bother us).
Perhaps that helps explain the following Bushism.
http://www.slate.com/id/2071446/
We need an energy bill that encourages consumption. —Trenton, N.J., Sept. 23, 2002
Perhaps the extremely low interest rates just a few years after he said that was part of our energy bill. It sure seems to be part of mine anyway (pun intended).
I'm having a hard time separating the gallows from the humor today and the reality from the illusion. I guess that brings me to my next point based on what you've said.
i sure don't know the answer
I'm finding it a lot easier to be a critic/heckler than a problem solver. That's for sure!
Post a Comment