Making low-carbon food: a mission for the entire value chain

To reduce the carbon footprint of their products, food processors need to address their biggest source of greenhouse gas emissions: the raw materials that come from farms.

The manufacturing of a food product goes through many stages. Cheddar, for example, begins with the birth of a calf and the cultivation of the forage to feed it, followed by the care and milking of the cows, the curdling of the milk and then the molding, salting, maturing and packaging of the cheese. And more! To reduce the carbon footprint of his cheddar, a cheesemaker can therefore intervene at each of these stages.

However, the biggest source of greenhouse gases (GHGs) is not the factory or the transport trucks, but… the farm! Whatever the food, the biggest share of GHGs emitted by an agri-food processor comes not from its industrial processes, but from manure management on the farm, the spreading of nitrogen fertilizers in the fields and animal digestion in the barn.

This is why, to produce food with a smaller carbon footprint, processors have no choice but to work with the farms from which their milk, grain or meat comes, and help them reduce their GHGs. Fortunately, their efforts are supported by a growing network of organizations that work with farms to facilitate their transition to a new agriculture that takes into account climate change.

Processor commitments

In recent years, Agropur, Nestlé, McCain, Danone and General Mills – to name but a few – have all committed to reducing their GHG emissions. Their goals are generally to reduce GHG emissions by 30% by 2030 and 100% by 2050. These are public commitments that respect the rules of recognized organizations such as SBTi.

These processors are driven by a variety of motivations: ensuring the solidity of their suppliers in the context of global warming, increasing their efficiency and profitability, selling low-carbon products, etc. However, they all share one point in common. However, they all have one thing in common: to reduce their GHG emissions, they need the collaboration of farms.

An opportunity for farms

As we all know, farmers are already faced with numerous challenges. Yet the processors’ GHG reduction targets are likely to require additional efforts from them. But these efforts also open the way to a business opportunity, since farms that reduce their own GHGs generate a new asset: a carbon asset. This carbon can then be valorized in the agri-food value chain, or on the markets.

In short, General Mills’ and Nestlé’s GHG reduction targets reflect a new vision of agriculture, which is more concerned about climate change and seeks the best ways to adapt to it. This involves, among other things, increasing organic matter in the soil and paying greater attention to animal and soil health.

Towards low-emission food

To reduce its GHGs, a food processor generally goes through five main stages.

The first is simply to determine its baseline year, i.e. the “year zero” from which it will measure its reductions. The second is to set an objective: the quantity of GHGs to be eliminated, and over what period of time. The third step is to draw up a GHG inventory, i.e. to paint the most accurate picture possible of the quantity of its emissions and their sources.

The inventory stage is the most complex, since the company must decide which activities it will take into account. In other words, it must determine the scope of its inventory.

This is complex, because there is no single answer. For example, a factory that manufactures cardboard packaging emits a certain quantity of GHGs. Who should account for them: the factory, or the people who buy its cardboard boxes? And if the factory and its end users share the emissions, what share should be attributed to each?

Companies carrying out their inventories ask themselves these questions about all their activities: the origin and manufacture of their inputs, their industrial processes, their deliveries, and so on.

Three main categories of emissions

To facilitate their analyses and determine their scope of their inventory, most companies follow the recommendations of the Greenhouse Gas Protocol, THE benchmark for GHG inventories.

This organization suggests dividing emissions into three categories, or “scopes”:

• Scope 1 emissions come directly from the company itself, for example, from its factories or offices.
• Scope 2 emissions include GHGs emitted by the production of electricity used by the company. In Quebec, these emissions are generally negligible, since electricity comes almost exclusively from hydroelectricity, which is highly non-polluting.
• Scope 3 emissions occur before or after the activities carried out by the company, that is, those originating from its suppliers or customers. Think of the GHGs linked to the production of the milk a cheese-maker buys, for example, or the use of a car after it has left the factory.

All three types of emissions can be associated with a given product, but the emissions inventory for a province or country only accounts for Scope 1 emissions. This avoids counting GHGs twice, i.e. when a product is manufactured and when it is used.

Take action by supporting farms

Once its inventory is complete, the company moves on to the second-to-last step: deciding what measures it will put in place to reduce its emissions.

In the agri-food sector, a large proportion of GHGs come from farms. That’s why processors need to work with farmers. At present, this means providing them with funds or expertise to help them adopt agri-environmental practices that contribute to GHG reduction or carbon sequestration.

While these practices are cost-effective in the long term, implementing them requires some effort. After all, installing a liquid manure separator, increasing the longevity of a dairy cow or reducing the application of mineral nitrogen fertilizers doesn’t just happen. Fortunately, the implementation of these new practices does not rest solely on the backs of farms. More and more organizations, such as the Union des producteurs agricoles and Producteurs de lait du Québec, are concerned about the effects of global warming on agricultural production, and want to help producers adapt to it.

Once the new practices are in place, it takes at least three or four years to see their effects. Time on the farm is a little different than in other industries, since we work to the rhythm of the seasons…

Finally, the fifth and last step towards low-emission food is monitoring. Basically, companies need to redo a GHG inventory every year, using the same methodology, to ensure that the measures put in place are actually having the anticipated effects.

Time to act

More and more agri-food processors are committing themselves to taking action against climate change, alongside farms, agricultural associations and governments. Their goal is to create a new kind of agriculture, one that takes account of climate change and pays greater attention to organic matter, animal health and soil health.

Producers should of course exercise caution before committing themselves to these projects, and ask all relevant questions before signing anything.

But they should also take a close interest. Climate change is here to stay. Carbon and GHG reduction issues are likely to take up more and more space in the agricultural world. This is something to keep in mind when planning future investments on the farm, while thinking about buyers, the health of animals, the soil… and the climate.