LAND USE IMPACTS OF THE LIVESTOCK AND PALM OIL INDUSTRIES Yusof Basiron*, Yew Foong-Kheong

Transcription

1 Journal of Oil Palm, Environment & Health An official publication of the Malaysian Palm Oil Council (MPOC) Review Open Access Journal of Oil Palm, Environment & Health 2015, 6:1-9 doi: /jope LAND USE IMPACTS OF THE LIVESTOCK AND PALM OIL INDUSTRIES Yusof Basiron*, Yew Foong-Kheong Abstract Livestock and palm oil industries are both vital agricultural farming systems providing food to the world. The activities of these industries require land for production. Between them, the livestock industry requires extensive land and is, thus, found to be the primary cause of deforestation in the world. In 2012, it used nearly 300 times more land area than oil palm. As very large areas need to be cleared, a very large non-recurrent carbon stock loss and carbon debt are incurred by the livestock industry. This debt is 612 times larger than that of the palm oil industry. As time progresses, the carbon debt of the livestock industry deepens since it is a recurrent carbon source. On the contrary, the relatively smaller carbon debt of the palm oil industry decreases with time since it is a net carbon sink. 1. Introduction The importance of ensuring food security is of paramount importance. World population is increasing at a rapid pace. By mid-2013, there were 7.1 billion people in the world 1 and the population will balloon by another 35% to 9.6 billion by In order to ensure food security, food production must increase in tandem with population increase. One of the challenges to ensure food security is to reduce disparity in availability of food as well as its affordability. According to the United Nations 3, 842 million people do not have enough food to eat. The vast majority of them live in developing countries. The urgency to address these issues is clear since the need to eradicate extreme poverty and hunger" is the first objective of the United Nations Millennium Development Goals 4. Key words Livestock, palm oil, deforestation, carbon stock, GHG, avoided deforestation, carbon debt JOPEH 2015, 6:1-9 *Corresponding Author Address: Malaysian Palm Oil Council, 2nd Floor, Wisma Sawit, Lot 6, SS 6, Jalan Perbandaran, Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia yusof@mpoc.org.my Published: 21 January 2015 Received: 1 November 2014 Accepted: 8 January Yusof Basiron This is an Open Access article which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 1

2 In addition to population increase, growing affluence and growing economies are also contributing to a greater demand for food. With higher per capita income, there is usually a shift in diet, particularly towards a higher consumption of animal products and other high value food such as eggs, meat and fats 5. Thus, it is envisaged that livestock and palm oil products are among the food items, which will be affected by this shift in demand. The livestock and palm oil industries also share another common trait in that both industries are socially and politically very significant. The livestock industry accounts for 40% of the world s agricultural gross domestic product and creates employment for 1 billion of the world s poor 5. Similarly, using Malaysia, which is the second largest palm oil producer in the world 6, as an example, the palm oil is the leading agriculture export for the country 7. It also ranks second as an export revenue earner. The industry employs at least half a million workers who earn wages which are 2.5 times higher than the poverty income level in Malaysia 8. On the social front, a recent survey showed that the base industry has contributed significantly towards uplifting the livelihood and welfare of rural communities 8. Both livestock production and oil palm cultivation are farming systems, which require land. The expansion of these two industries, therefore, will require more land, including possibly forested areas. This is often looked upon unfavourably by environmental NGOs. As such, the palm oil industry is often criticized and blamed as being the primary driver of deforestation 9,10. It has been said that the equivalent of about 300 football fields of rainforest are cleared every hour to make way for oil palm cultivation 11. Similarly, expansion of the livestock industry has been blamed as a major cause of deforestation 5,12. Livestock industry has also been heavily criticized for contributing to climate change. About 7.1 billion tonnes CO2 equivalent (Bt CO2e) are emitted annually by the livestock industry 5. This is equivalent to 18% of the anthropogenic emissions in the world. A more recent report 13 said that the contribution is even higher, amounting to at least 51% of global warming. Deforestation in tropical regions from logging and agricultural development alone has been reported to contribute to an estimated 10% of anthropogenic CO2 emissions 14 and is said to be a serious cause of climate change 15,16. Clearing of peat and resultant peat fires are also reported to hasten climate change with high annual GHG emissions of 2,000 Mt CO2e 17. The latter authors claim that emission from peatland alone accounts for almost 8% of global emission. The purpose of this report is to evaluate land use effects attributed to these two agoindustries. 2. Methodology Information was gathered for the livestock and palm oil industries and their sources of origin are cited accordingly. The year of 2012 was taken as the base year for these analyses. Land used for livestock production in 2012 was calculated based on information obtained from FAO 5 whereby the estimated consumption of meat increased 34% in developing countries and 10% in developed countries, or an average of 22%, between This increase in meat consumption has to be met by an increase in land area for production. For this study, it is assumed that a 22% increase in meat requirement will be met with a 22% increase in land area requirement. The loss of carbon stock on land that was used by the livestock and palm oil industries was calculated as follows: Loss of carbon stock (Mt CO 2) = Area that was cleared (ha) x Amount of carbon stock contained in the area (Mt CO 2/ha). 2

3 A comparison was then made between the industries based on the results obtained. 3. Results & discussions 3.1. Land use Raising livestock such as cattle, sheep and goats is land extensive. These animals need land for grazing. The stocking rate depends on the kind of animal, the type of pasture and the climatic region. For example, the stocking rate for a cow can vary from 2 acres (0.8 ha) up to 40 acres (16 ha) 18. It may need 100 acres (40 ha) during a bad drought. Oil palms are planted densely, with 1.0 hectare (ha) of land with oil palms, depending on soil and edaphic conditions 19, 20. For livestock production, two kinds of land are needed, namely grazing or pasture land and land to grow crops which will be made into animal feed. Large areas are needed for the former type of land use but this area has been reduced somewhat in recent times, with the intensification process whereby more animals are stocked within the same area 5. This is possible since parts of the food requirements of the animals are obtained from animal feed that are grown ex situ. According to FAO 5, 3.87 billion hectares (Bha) of land were used for livestock production in 2006 as shown in Table 1. In the same year, oil palm occupied 9.9 million ha (Mha) 21 and was then 391 times smaller in terms of land utilized compared to livestock production. In 2012, land utilized for livestock production increased to an estimated 4.67 Bha. Of this, 4.1 Bha were used for grazing while another 0.57 Bha were used to grow crops to produce animal feed. In 2012, oil palm was cultivated on 15.6 Mha. This crop occupied only 0.10% of total land area in the world; the latter area being 14.9 Bha 23. This is shown in Figure 1A. The livestock industry occupied 31.36%. Thus, it is seen that the livestock industry needs a large expanse of land for production. It used 300 times more land area than oil palm. In 2050, it is projected that meat production will more than double 5, assuming no change in technological advancement. The land area needed will also double. For livestock production, this will require 9,346 Mha or 62.72% of total land area in the world. For oil palm, doubling the cultivation would only require 31.2 Mha of land or a meagre 0.21% of the world's total land area. The livestock industry is also, undoubtedly, the biggest user of agricultural land in the world. With a total of 5,662 Mha of land used for agriculture in the world 24, the livestock industry used 82.53% of the total area in Oil palm used only 0.28% of the area and this is shown in Figure 1B. Table 1: Land used for livestock and palm oil production in the world Parameter Livestock Palm oil Year 2006 a 2012 b 2012 c Land (pastures) 3,400 million ha 4,100 million ha - Land (animal feed production) 470 million ha 573 million ha - Total amount of land used 3,870 million ha 4,673 million ha 15.6 million ha c Sources A: FAO 5 B: Projected area C: Oil World 22 (area consists of mature and immature oil palms) 3

4 Figure 1A: Area used by various land use types as percentage of total land area in Forest issues The importance of obtaining high yield from comparable land areas is of paramount importance. Following this principle, less land area will then be needed to obtain high output of food. As such, there would still be remaining land for use by other forms of agriculture so as to ensure food security in the future. In this respect, among the major vegetable oil crops, oil palm is the most efficient in terms of oil yield per hectare 25. It is a perennial crop and is productive throughout the year. With high oil productivity of 4.1 tonnes /ha/year, it requires only a smaller parcel of land to produce a large oil output. It yields 11.4 times more than soya, 7 times more than rapeseed and 10 times more than sunflower. Thus, oil palm requires 11.4 times less land area than soya, 7 times less area than rapeseed and 10 times less area than sunflower to produce the same amount of oil. Figure 1B: Area used by various land use types as percentage of total agricultural land area in

5 As a source of oils and fats, a preference of palm oil over soya, rapeseed and sunflower oils, means that more forests can be conserved and deforestation is avoided, therefore. The area that can be saved through "avoidance of deforestation" 26 can be significant. In 2012, there were 14.3 Mha of mature oil palm areas which produced 46.7 Mt of oil 6. In order to produce the same amount of oil as oil palm, rapeseed will require 100 Mha, sunflower 143 Mha and soya 163 Mha of land. These results are shown in Table 2. The presence of 14.3 Mha of mature oil palm helped avoid the need to clear more forest, ranging from 86 to 149 Mha; an area which is equivalent to times the size of Belgium Loss of carbon stock When forested land is cleared and the subsequent land use type has a lower carbon stock content than the original forest, there is a resultant net loss of carbon stock from the standing biomass. This is a one-off loss as clearing of forested land occurs once only. However, when oil palm is cultivated on peatland, there is an additional loss of carbon stock from peat decomposition underground. The non-recurrent carbon stock loss arising from the livestock industry is estimated to be 696,676 Mt CO2 while that due to planting oil palm is lower, with 1,139 Mt CO2. These results are shown in Table 3. Thus, on a global scale, the conversion of land for livestock causes 612 times more loss of carbon stock than planting oil palm. Table 2: Land needed to cultivate major oil crops to produce equivalent amount of oil* Area needed to produce Crop equivalent oil output as current Avoided deforestation oil palm area** (Mha) (Mha) Oil palm (Mature/Yielding) Rapeseed Sunflower Soya *46.7 Mt of oil **Year 2012 Land use Table 3: Non-recurrent GHG emissions in livestock and palm oil industries Original type of land Area converted (Mha) Carbon stock** (t CO2/ha) LIVESTOCK* Grassland 934** 4.44 Total carbon stock loss (Mt CO2) 4,147 Temperate forest 3,272** ,440 Tropical forest 467** ,089 TOTAL 4, ,676 OIL PALM Logged over forest (mineral soil) Logged over forest (peat soil) above ground biomass *** 121 Logged over forest (peat soil) below ground emissions **** 120 1,139 * Assumption that total area is derived from 20% grassland, 70% temperate forest and 10% tropical forest ** Carbon stock values based on IPCC 27 *** Extrapolated value based on disturbed peat swamp forest biomass 28 **** RSPO 29 5

6 Type of emission Table 4: Recurrent GHG emissions in livestock industry Amount of Emission (Mt CO2e/year) Emission to produce animal feed 610 Animal enteric fermentation 2,200 Methane release from animal manure 2,680 Processing/Transport 120 TOTAL EMISSION 5,610 Note: Emission projections using base data from FAO Recurrent GHG emissions in livestock and palm oil industries The daily activities in the conduct of business in the livestock and palm oil industries also result in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Such emissions are recurrent. Methane has a global warming potential, which is 21 times greater than CO2 30. In the livestock industry, methane emission from animal dung is the biggest source of pollution and this amounts to 2,680 Mt CO2e annually as seen from the results in Table 4. This source forms 48% of the total GHG emission from the livestock industry. Ruminants also emit large amounts of methane through belching and a smaller amount through flatulence. Animal enteric fermentation and flatulence contribute another 39% of the total recurrent GHG emission by releasing 2,200 Mt CO2e/year. The balance of 13% of emission comes from processing, transport and production of animal feed. On the other hand, the palm oil industry is a net carbon sink. The oil palm is a perennial crop and removes large amounts of CO2 from the atmosphere during photosynthesis daily. In oil palm cultivation, the fresh fruit bunches, which contain the fruits, are harvested and taken to the palm oil mills for processing. During processing, the fruits are removed to leave behind the empty fruit bunches (EFB). There are two situations with regard to the fate of the EFB. The first situation is when the EFB are returned to the oil palm fields and placed on the soil in order to improve the soil fertility. Here, they decompose and return nutrients 31 and organic matter 32 back to the soil. In the second situation, the EFB are not returned to the field but are sold to companies that make them into compost. In the first situation, a total of 1,972 Mt CO2 are removed from the atmosphere by an estimated 2.3 billion oil palms that are grown on 15.6 Mha of land, concentrated mainly in Indonesia and Malaysia 18. These results are shown in Table 5. In the second situation, the removal of EFB away from the fields mean that the carbon budget remaining in the oil palm field will be lower with a value of 1,794 Mt CO2/year. The results in Table 5 also show that even when GHG emission from peatland planted with oil palm is taken into account, the cultivated oil palm area in the world is still a net CO2 sink. On an annual basis, 1,897 Mt of CO2 are removed by cultivated oil palms. If the EFB are not returned to the field, the carbon economy in the field is reduced to a fixation of 1,719 million tonnes CO2/year. 6

7 Parameter Table 5: Recurrent CO2 removal by palm oil industry Annual CO Annual CO 2 removal or addition 2 removal or addition when EFB returned to field when EFB not returned to field Area of oil palm ( Mha) [ a ] In situ CO 2 sequestered by oil palm in world ( Mt CO 2 /year) [ b] CO 2 production from use of fossil fuel (Mt CO 2 /year) [ c ] Net potential CO 2 sequestered by oil palm in world ( Mt CO 2 /year) [ b-c=d ] GHG emission from peat soils ( Mt CO 2 e) [ e ] Net amount of CO 2 sequestration (Mt CO 2 e) [ d-e ] + 1, , , , ,719 +1,897 Notes 1. (a) is total area of oil palm grown in world and consists of mature and immature oil palms 2. (b) and (c) are estimated based on information obtained from Henson item (c) is CO 2e of fossil fuel used to run machineries & industrial production of fertilizers & chemicals used in oil palm plantations 4. item (e) Source 34 and GHG emission is from 2 million ha of oil palm planted on peat 4. Conclusions As the world population spirals upwards, there is a need to ensure food sufficiency and food security for mankind. Food production, whether it is to rear livestock or to grow oil palm, requires land. The common way to increase food production is to increase land area through land clearing. The clearing of tracts of new land, when forested, carries negative connotations as it is often linked to deforestation. Burning of plant biomass is often a part of the land clearing process that is carried out to facilitate agriculture production activities. The burning of biomass releases CO2 into the atmosphere and hastens climate change. It is for these reasons that environmental nongovernment organizations are concerned about the rapid rate of land clearing. As such, the expansion of the oil palm industry has often been accused as the driver of deforestation. This study shows that livestock industry, rather than oil palm cultivation was the primary cause of deforestation. The livestock industry used 300 times more land than the palm oil industry to produce food in It occupied 4.7 Bha of land or 31% of the total land area available in the world. In comparison, oil palm was grown on 15.6 Mha of land and occupied only 0.1 % of the world's total land area. Non-recurrent carbon stock loss occurs during land clearing when biomass is burnt and CO2 is released into the atmosphere. It is a one off affair. Arising from the large amount of land cleared and, thus, larger deforestation of the livestock industry, it is not surprising to note that this carbon debt incurred for livestock production, through land clearing, is 612 times greater than that incurred by the palm oil industry. The carbon stock loss from the palm oil industry is 1.14 Bt while that caused by the livestock industry is 697 Bt. On an annual recurrent basis, the carbon debt of the livestock industry deepens since it incurs 7

8 a net carbon emission amounting to 5.6 Bt CO2e annually. On the contrary, the carbon debt of the palm oil industry decreases over time since it is a net carbon sink, removing 1,719-1,897 Mt of CO2e annually. References wsid= Millennium Development Goals. 5. FAO (2006) Livestock's long shadow: environmental issues and options, pp ISTA Mielke GmbH (2013) ISTA Oil World Statistics. 7. Bank Negara Malaysia(2012) Annual Report 2011, pp Ahmad Tarmizi, A.(2008). Felda-A success story, Global Oils & Fats,5,1, ten-causes-of-deforestation-gallery Global palm oil demand fuelling deforestation _issue.php- Say No To Oil Palm we_work/amazon/pr- Unsustainable cattle ranching /eng/news/205/so_34.htm New study: 51% of greenhouse gas emissions come from livestock industry. 14. Doom,Justing (2012). Deforestation emissions may be a third of prior estimates oil. Palm oil nvironmental-impact.of-deforerstation. 17. Hooijer, A., Silvius M., Wosten, H., Page, S (2006) PEAT-CO2: Assessment of CO2 emissions from drained peatlands in SE Asia, pp on/index?qid= How many beef cattle per acre? 19. von Uexkull,H, Henson,I.E., Fairhurst,T. (2003). Canopy management to optimize yield.in Fairhurst,T & Hardter,R. Oil palm, management and sustainable yields, International Potash Institute, Esnan Ab.Ghani.(2009). Penanaman, perusahaan sawit di Malaysia:Satu panduan, MPOB, ISTA Mielke GmbH (2008) Oil World Annual Report ISTA Mielke GmbH (2013) Oil World Annual Report Land use statistics by country. stics_by country 24. World development indicators: Agricultural inputs Yew, F.K., Sundram, K., Basiron, Y. (2010). Mitigating climate change through oil palm cultivation, Int.J.Global Warming,Vol.2,2, Basiron,Y., Yew,F.K.(2013). An evaluation of the suitability of some biofuel feedstocks, Jour. Oil Palm & the Environment,4, IPCC (2006). IPCC guidelines for national GHG inventories programmes. 28. Morel, A.C., Saatchi,S.S.,Malhi,Y., Berry,N.J., Banin,L., Burslem,D., nilus,r., Ong,R.C (2011). Estimating aboveground biomass in forest and oil palm plantation in 8

9 Sabah, Malaysian Borneo using ALOS PALSAR data. Forest Ecology and Management 262: RSPO (2012). RSPO manual on best management practices for existing oil palm cultivation on peat,pp global warming potentials. 31. Singh, G., Kow., D.I., Lee.,K.H., Lim, K.C., Loong, S.G.(2009). Empty fruit bunches as mulch IN Singh,G., Lim, K.H., Teo,L., Chan, K.W. Sustainable production of palm oil,malaysian Palm Oil Association, Mohd.Basri W., Choo Y.M., Chan K.W. Further advances in oil palm research ( ) Vol.1. Malaysian Palm Oil Board, Henson,I.E. (2009).Comparative ecophysiology of oil palm and tropical rainforest IN Singh, G., Lim, K.H., Teo,L., Chan, K.W. Sustainable production of palm oil: A Malaysian Perspective, Malaysian Palm Oil Association, Yew, F.K., Sundram, K., Yusof, B. (2010). Estimation of GHG emissions from peat used for agriculture with special reference to oil palm. Jour. Oil Palm & the Environment 2010, 1, Khalid, H., Ahmad Tarmizi, M., Zuklkifli,H.(2011). Nutrient management and agronomic utilization of wastes for sustainable oil palm production IN 9