What seems to have no connection does indeed have some, of course on a conceptual level rather than in detailed specifications. Giving a little thoughts to it, one finds similarities between organic farming and so-called alternative energies, mainly photovoltaic (PV) and wind^[1].

Both are based on not using conventional means: no nuclear plants nor fossil fuels for one, no synthetic chemicals (fertilizers, pesticides, GMOs) for the other. Beliefs, fears, convictions or ideologies, regardless of the word, are at the origin of these exclusions.

Both offer an already existing product, with no difference in quality. At the electrical outlet there are 380/220 V under 50 Hz (or 110V and 60 Hz for exotic Americans). In the consumer basket there are fruits and vegetables, the taste of which are impossible to be distinguished by double blind test, or the quality differentiated by chemical analysis, when of the same variety^[2].

Both are inherently inefficient. For alternative power forms it’s because of their intermittency; they are unavailable for 75-90% of the time. Organic products have lower harvest yields implying lower production for the farmer on the limited area of his farm, or the cultivable surface must be increased to overcome the lack of acre productivity, the problem being that unless deforesting or destructing cities, arable areas cannot increase.

Their costs are higher. For alternative energy redundant investment are required because power supply must be guaranteed without interruption. For organically grown crops most intense work and lower yields increase unit costs; expensive fertilizers and pesticides are also applied, but must be certified organic.

In case of production failure it is necessary to resort to traditional methods, without delay. The water reservoirs must be full, or coal or gas units must be in a preheated standby, while nuclear and run-on-the-river plants provide a continuous background supply. I do not really know what an organic farmer decides if he sees his crop massively attacked by a pathogen, such as a potato field getting completely destroyed by late blight (Phytophthora infestans): accept total loss, or apply an effective, therefore not organic, fungicide?

Prices for consumers are even higher. An additional margin is always added to cover the inefficiencies in the distribution and the costs of the additional promotional activities needed to sell a more expensive products with no differences from others, if not by their mode of production.

Market access is partially limited. PV’s production is highly decentralized, small-scale, and low-voltage; to redistribute it over long distances and high voltage is almost impossible. Organic produces, especially vegetables, are sold in local markets, often directly from the producer to the consumer; but the farmer who engages in local marketing must, at the same time, produce, harvest, store, distribute, and sell, and he or she only has 24 hours a day.

Their penetration is limited. Consumer budgets are not expandable, the technical capacity of the distribution networks cannot absorb everything[3], many producers cannot or do not want to make the conversion for technical, economic, and bureaucratic reasons, and also because of lack of training.

Marketing tactics are similar: these market segments are driven by concerns about sustainable development. The customer, consumers and prescribers such as state institutions or opinion makers, will find satisfaction in a purchase for which she will have been told that she acts “responsibly”. The common key words are: sustainable, alternative, responsible, equitable, and environmentally friendly.

The mode of production is guaranteed by certificates. There is no other means of verification for the consumer, an apple is an apple, and an electron is an electron. Therefore organic labels for agriculture are awarded by private institutes recognized by the state. For electricity, retailers declare their procurement policies (e.g. IWB in Basel: no nuclear) and have their accounts audited.

Economic profitability is fragile, often negative. It depends primarily on what the competition is doing, because production by conventional methods is constantly improving, in price and quality.

The failure of economic profitability is mitigated by subsidy systems. The state does not only provides a boost to start-ups to give birth to new solutions. It interferes in the market by guidance mechanisms. Subsidies, other incentives, or taxes become a durable component of the business model for these technologies.
Essentially short-lived, when policies change, the business model gets obsolete, such as mills and mirrors in Spain, or pumped-storage installations in Hongrin and Nant de Drance in Switzerland.

 

The limitations of this analysis of similarities will be understood, I hope. But these two relatively recent technologies are in tune with the times, in line with postmodernity where affects are more important than the tangible effects[4], while believing in eternal economic prosperity.

However, there is one major difference that distinguishes these two modes of production. The electric power industry is engaged in what is called a natural monopoly for one cannot imagine many power lines in the landscape, or multiple cables entering the houses. The agricultural market is open, although in many countries, Switzerland and Japan being champions, protectionism and subsidies transform it into a state regulated economy.

This difference causes the energy choices to be imposed on us in more or less democratic manner by the holder of the monopoly, the State. Organic farming remains, still, a personal preference, tending to become a moral injunction.

 

[1] We exclude energy using biomass, including biofuels, that are no organic produces although being produced biologically, but not according to organic conditions, do you follow me?

[2] I know, I know, organic produces are always declared tastier by those who have decided to buy them. This is because these are almost never of the same varieties as these grown in conventional mode. A classic tomato or strawberry supports the stress caused by transportation and distribution delays. A genetically different variety, harvested daily and sold the same day in a local market, can be selected according to other quality criteria; but it can also be grown in a conventional manner and in this case there is no difference in taste, nutritional content, or composition. Making the test with different varieties would be similar to compare the quality of a Merlot with a Chardonnay, although both are of the same species Vitis vinifera, do you follow me?

[3] The power transportation and distribution grid becomes unstable if the share of intermittent supply goes beyond 25-30% of the total. The number of certified organic producers has stagnated at around 10% in the most advanced countries in this field.

[4] I come from the simple principle that old tech and new tech are all compatible with the safety requirements for humans and the environment. And you know my position on the futility and vanity to re-adjust the climatic irregularities.
The concept of clean tech is a bluff. Each technology has its advantages and disadvantages, and past and future implementation errors are no reasons to ban them, but rather to improve them.

Merci de compartir cet article