Let Them Eat Tofu!

The fringes of COP28 show the climate alarmists are coming for our food

Introduction

After covering the energy impact of the COP28 shindig, I thought it helpful to look at the nascent plans the great and good have for our food system. Although not part of the formal COP28 process, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) was at the meeting touting its roadmap for the global food system. Some of it sounds laudable and fairly innocuous until you set it in the context of what other UN agencies and alarmists such as George Monbiot are calling for. Where the alarmists lead, generally speaking, the global bodies follow.

This short article explores what is being proposed by the FAO, other UN agencies and Monbiot and looks at the potential impact if they get their way.

Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) Roadmap

As shown in Figure A, COP28 was the venue at which the first version of the Food System roadmap was presented as a global vision.

Figure A - FAO Process to Transform the Food System

It is envisaged that COP29 will be the venue where the global vision is broken down into a regional view and moves on to discussing costing and financing. COP30 will be the place where country action plans are established along with monitoring and accountability measures. The FAO has established ten domains of action which together contain 120 actions. These actions are designed to achieve a set of Food Security and Nutrition goals and contribute to the 1.5^oC agenda as shown in Figure B.

Figure B - FAO Food Security and Nutrition Goals

Quite how halving of N₂O emissions by 2040, CH₄ (methane) emissions by 2045 and how agri-food systems become a net carbon sink by 2050 is left to the imagination.

The Monbiot Plan

However, we can get a flavour of the direction of travel if we look at the demands of the Guardian’s chief climate fulminator, George Monbiot. He couldn’t resist joining the calls to leave fossil fuels in the ground. He wants to go further and end livestock farming too (see Figure C). Effectively, he is calling for the cows to be sacrificed to appease the weather gods.

Figure C - George Monbiot calls to leave fossil fuels in the ground and end livestock farming

Other UN Agencies

Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the Director-General of WHO also got in on the act at COP28.

He claimed that:

“Our food systems are harming the health of people and contribute to over 30% of greenhouse gas emissions and account for almost one third of the global burden of disease. Transforming food systems is therefore essential by shifting towards healthier, diversified and more plant-based diets.”

As Figure D from Our World in Data (using the UN’s own data) shows, our food system is so deadly tha life expectancy has soared since 1950, only dipping during the Covid pandemic.

Figure D - Life Expectation At Birth By Sex (Source Our World in Data

Impact of Removing Fossil Fuels from the Food Chain

Methane or natural gas is an essential ingredient in the production of ammonia using the Haber-Bosch process. About 80% of ammonia production is used to make nitrogen fertilisers. No natural gas, no fertiliser. The thing is, about half of the world’s population is dependent upon synthetic nitrogen fertilisers as Figure E from Our World in Data shows.

Figure E - Half of World Population Dependent Upon Nitrogen Fertiliser (Source - Our World in Data)

Nitrogen fertilisers are also responsible for more than 60% of world N₂O emissions. So, whether we cut fertiliser (and N₂O emissions) use as per the FAO plan or have no nitrogen fertiliser because we have left methane in the ground as Monbiot demands, then up to half the world’s population is at risk of starvation and it is likely average life expectancy will drop somewhat.

Impact of Reducing Methane Emissions from the Food Chain

As we saw above, the FAO wants to halve methane emissions from agriculture by 2045. According to the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), about a third of global methane emissions come from livestock and a further 8% from paddy rice cultivation. Of course, rice is a food staple for more than 3.5 billion people. Cutting rice production will lead to mass starvation.

To reduce emissions the UNEP wants us to “shift towards plant-rich diets and embrace alternative sources of protein.” This sounds ominously like the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) call for us all to start eating insects. Of course, George Monbiot wants to go much further and “end most livestock farming.” This effectively means no more meat: no beef, no lamb and no pork. In his piece, he is unclear about whether he would allow us to keep poultry, but he has previously called for us to stop eating chicken, so I guess that also means the Christmas (or Thanksgiving) turkey is at risk too.

If we are to cut emissions from livestock in half as per the FAO, which is essentially a call for halving meat consumption or eliminate meat almost entirely as Monbiot demands, what will be the impact on our diet?

Our World in Data has an interesting chart on our sources of protein as shown in Figure E.

Figure E - World, UK and US per capita sources of protein (Source - Our World in Data)

Of course, eggs come from poultry and dairy comes from cattle. Adding it all up, 59.4% of US protein, 50.0% of UK protein and 32.1% of World protein is derived from animal products. Moreover, meat, dairy and eggs are sources of other vital nutrients such as iron, calcium, zinc, other trace elements and vitamins A, B2 and B12. If livestock and poultry are halved or eliminated, that leaves a massive nutrition gap.

Of course, the alarmists will say that if we get rid of livestock, there will be more space for arable crops that we could eat instead. However, if we also cut fertilisers then the yield on that land will fall. And how many people want to be forced into a vegan (or insect) diet?

Conclusions

Cutting or eliminating fertilisers puts half the world at risk of starvation. Cutting or eliminating meat leaves another giant hole in global nutrition. The various UN authorities are playing with fire. The alarmists like Monbiot are pushing for even more totalitarian control over our food system. Energy and food are the lifeblood of society. What they are doing and proposing represents an existential threat to humanity. I remain to be convinced that changes in global temperature by a few degrees will wreak more havoc than restricting energy and restructuring the food system. The supposed cure is far worse than the alleged disease.

I am reminded of the famous quote often attributed to Marie Antoinette during a famine in France: “Let them eat cake.” The modern-day equivalent from the out of touch, self-appointed elites might be “let them eat tofu,” or even worse “let them eat bugs.” We can only hope that these developments do not lead to the same bloody outcome as the French Revolution.

---

If you have enjoyed this article, please share it with your family, friends and colleagues and sign up to receive more content.