The FDF is a premier trade body which brings together a wide range of interests across the UK food and drink sector, the largest manufacturing industry in the UK. Our industry employs over 440,000 people in the UK, is responsible for about £21 billion of Gross Value Added to the UK food chain each year and purchases over two-thirds of all domestic agricultural produce. It also creates market outlets for UK farmers as well as providing a valuable service to its customers and consumers.

Callton Young is Director of Sustainability and Competitiveness at FDF, a role he took on in late 2006 on a two year secondment from the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra). His aim has been to develop and implement the FDF's Environmental Ambition and to develop a policy framework for the FDF's economic priorities.

"As Head of the Food and Drink Industry Division in Defra, I was the lead official for developing the Food Industry Sustainability Strategy which was launched by Secretary of State Margaret Beckett in April 2006 for all sectors in the food chain beyond the farmgate," Mr Young says. "It threw down a range of challenges to industry, including a 20 per cent absolute reduction in on site CO2 emissions by 2010 compared to 1990. Amongst other things, it also encouraged industry action to reduce water use, packaging reaching households and food transport miles."

Is the food and drink industry under particular pressure to take a lead on reducing GHG emissions?

"The world as a whole is under pressure to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions in order to tackle climate change which is arguably the biggest single challenge facing mankind and the planet. That is why FDF in its Five-fold Environmental Ambition launched in October 2007, committed to achieving a 20 per cent absolute reduction in on site CO2 emissions by 2010 compared to 1990.

"More importantly, we are on track to deliver that goal - the latest figures available show that collectively FDF members have saved an average of 58,000 tonnes of CO2 emissions per year, the equivalent of taking 22,000 cars of the road each year."

FDF members last year committed to even deeper cuts in carbon emissions: what are the facts and figures behind this move?

"Yes, FDF's Five-fold Environmental Ambition includes an aspiration for members to collectively achieve a 30 per cent absolute reduction in CO2 emissions by 2020 because we want to show leadership nationally and internationally on this global challenge. This higher target is the level of ambition that the EU has promised to adopt if other developed countries commit to a 20 per cent reduction and it puts FDF members ahead of the game as new drivers for tackling climate change are introduced such at the Climate Change Act 2008 and Climate Change Budgets.

"In broad terms, how will you attempt to achieve this ambition? "Investment by FDF members in energy efficiency improvements, as offered by combined heat and power plants and new plant and equipment such as baking ovens, account for some of the progress that has been made.

"However, increasingly, improvements are arising from investments in renewable forms of energy such as that derived from biomass boilers and wind turbines. FDF is providing members with a helping hand by promoting the benefits of carbon management best practice, helped by our Carbon Management Best Practice Guide and our growing collection of case studies which demonstrate what is achievable in practice."

Can you give some concrete examples of members' carbon reduction efforts?

"Our best practice case studies show a mixture of large and small companies investing in projects to save energy and reduce CO2 emissions. They show reductions in CO2 emissions ranging from 10 per cent to 70 per cent.

"Our Tate & Lyle, British Sugar and McCain Foods' case studies alone show a combined saving of 165,000 tonnes of CO2 emissions per year going forward. They entail investment in a biomass boiler, combined heat and power and wind turbines respectively."

What about other aspects of sustainability: packaging, water use and landfill and so on?

"FDF has made solid progress in all areas of our Five-fold Environmental Ambition. Our recent survey shows that FDF members recover or recycle 82 per cent of the food and packaging waste that arises at production sites. Furthermore members are working to prevent the 17 per cent of such waste that goes to landfill through waste prevention or treatment such as anaerobic digestion.

"FDF has double the number of its members signed up to the Courtauld Commitment in the past year and they now account of over half of companies working with WRAP to reduce the amount of packaging reaching households.

"We jointly launched the Federation House Commitment with Envirowise under which 237 food and drink production sites across the UK are now working to save water. We also have 47 companies with a combined turnover of £17 billion, signed up to FDF's Checklist and Clause to achieve fewer and friendlier food transport miles."

Is there a particular carbon reduction success of which you are particularly proud?

"It would be wrong to single out any particular company or project because FDF's approach is about collective progress and success. Therefore my pride is in the 17 per cent absolute reduction in CO2 emission that FDF members have collectively agreed between 1990 and 2006 and the progress has been made since then and will be reflected in more up to date data when that becomes available next year."

What are the biggest obstacles facing Federation members who are trying to reduce emissions?

"It has been issues such as the price of carbon or lack of consistency in some policy instruments. However, we tend not to focus on the barriers rather look for solutions."

Could government do more to help?

"There is always more that can be done when tackling global challenges such as climate change or an economic downturn."

Will the current economic climate push carbon emissions further down firms' agendas?

"The investments being made by FDF members are a 'win-win' for the environment and for business which, in the current economic climate, is good news as it means we remain confident that the commitment to this agenda will continue."

Is the carbon labelling of individual products starting to take off?

"FDF believes that a single methodology to measure carbon footprints across the supply chain is best and will support PAS 2050 as an important tool for identifying and driving CO2 hotspots out of the food chain. Product labelling is a matter for individual companies to decide upon and it is too soon since publication of the PAS 2050 to summarise their intentions."

What's next on your agenda?

"For FDF and its Five-fold Environmental Ambition, it will be building on the solid start that members have made over the past year. As encouraged by Secretary State Hilary Benn at FDF' s One-Year-on-Event on 27 November, the focus will be on even more food and drink companies working under FDF's Five-fold Environmental Ambition to make a collective difference to the environment. That will mean more companies signing up to the Federation House Commitment to reduce water use, more signing up to the Courtauld Commitment to reduce packaging reaching consumers, and more supporting FDF's Checklist and Clause for Greener Food Transport.

"It will also mean more work to prevent food waste or collaborating with NISP to treat it in anaerobic digesters. Moreover, it will mean making more progress to reduce CO2 emissions to tackle climate change.

"The task of driving this forward will fall to my successor. As for me, my aim is for another big job in Government where I can make a real difference to the quality of life in the UK."

What advice would you give to someone taking on a role similar to yours?

"Grasp any role like this with both hands and with confidence that business will be supportive providing you make the vision clear, meaningful and achievable yet stretching."

The Food and Drink Federation: http://www.fdf.org.uk/

Twists And Turns On The Road To Sustainable Diesel

On the face of it biomass is a tempting alternative to fossil fuels such as coal, oil and gas. Biomass derived from plants absorb carbon dioxide as part of their natural growth, while the waste found in landfill sites or processed in sewage plants is a ready source of methane which can be captured and burned instead of escaping into the atmosphere to do more damage.

Biomass also holds out the hope of reducing our dependence on fossil fuels at a time when their price is extremely volatile and anxiety about the continuity of supply is high, but without the re-engineering that a radically different fuel source would require from industry. In short, biomass seems to promise fuels of the kind we’re used to, but without the drawbacks.

Initially, the EU shared this optimism, particularly as a way of mitigating the effects of road transport. In 2003, the EU Biofuels Directive set the target of replacing 2% of vehicle fuel supply by 2005 and 5.75% by 2010. By 2005, some 3.9 million tons of biodiesel were produced in the EU per year, representing 81.5% of biofuels production. In 2007, the EU target for production of all types of biofuel was increased to 10% by 2020, but just the following year the European Environment Agency (EEA) called for its suspension while a new and more comprehensive scientific study of the environmental risks and benefits is undertaken.

The EEA isn’t alone in its doubts. In the UK, the Renewable Fuels Agency commissioned the Gallagher Review to look more closely at these issues. The effects of changes to land use are a significant challenge, the Review found: “We have concluded that there is a future for a sustainable biofuels industry but that feedstock production must avoid agricultural land that would otherwise be used for food production. This is because the displacement of existing agricultural production, due to biofuel demand, is accelerating land-use change and, if left unchecked, will reduce biodiversity and may even cause greenhouse gas emissions rather than savings,” said the Review.

“The introduction of biofuels should be significantly slowed until adequate controls to address displacement effects are implemented and are demonstrated to be effective. A slowdown will also reduce the impact of biofuels on food commodity prices, notably oil seeds, which have a detrimental effect upon the poorest people,” the Review concluded.

Whitehall is to consult further on these recommendations before reaching a final decision in December 2008. A key question is the Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (RTFO), which came into force in April 2008. The Review proposes keeping the current RTFO target for 2008-9 of 2.5%, but reducing the current trajectory – which commits us to 5% by 2010 – so that this target is reached by 2013-14 instead.

Second thoughts

Even before the findings of the Review were published some companies had already put their plans for biodiesel on hold. In 2007 National Express called a halt to plans for a trial of the fuel “until so called ‘second generation’ biofuels, which use non food crops such as wood chips and straw, are available or issues relating to the sustainability of the production have been addressed.”

Unilever has taken a similar stand, stating that the company believes that “first generation biofuels are neither environmentally efficient nor cost-effective ways to reduce GHG emissions...In fact, a negative CO2 balance occurs if forests or grasslands are replaced by crops which emit larger amounts of captured CO2 in their production.”

As one of the largest logistics organisations in the UK Royal Mail took an early interest in biodiesel, says head of sustainability Dr Martin Blake. Royal Mail shares these concerns about the impact of changing land use on emissions and food prices. They might be addressed if customers could be reasonably certain about where biodiesel comes from and how it was produced, but certainty is hard to find, says Blake. “There is no certification system that would satisfy us, so we would be dependent on oil companies for provenance,” he says.

Moreover, governments have shifted their position on what counts as biofuel. For example, production of biodiesel in Germany has soared, accounting for more than 50% of EU production in 2005. “This spectacular growth in the German market is the result of a very favourable legislation granting a total tax exemption for biofuels, and this whether it's in pure or mixed form. However, this legislation was modified on 1st August 2006,” notes the European Commission.

The Royal Mail strategy is to follow the government recommendations on biodiesel as laid down in the RTFO – whatever they turn out to be – but to concentrate on other ways of mitigating the effects of road transport, says Blake. These include making more efficient use of vehicles by introducing “double decker” trailers, for example. “This could save 20% of the fuel consumption of our heavy fleet,” he says.

More work needed

Such concerns are by no means the last word on biofuels. “If you want a sustainable source of biodiesel, I would say look at Jatropha,” says Blake. The shrub produces seeds that yield significant quantities of oil, and is able to grow in the most arid conditions. As a result it can be exploited without displacing food crops, and can flourish in poorer countries such as Sudan, or Ethiopia, providing those countries with a much needed source of income.

This and other sources of biofuel – feedstocks like vegetable oils, starch ethanol or sugar ethanol – are only the “first generation”. It is possible that in future there will be other sources, such as genetically modified microbes or algae, for example. Beginning in December 2008, the Carbon Trust is to invest up to £15 million in the Algae Biofuels Challenge, a programme to stimulate commercial applications of the technology for road transport.

However, some experts remain sceptical. “Some people are talking about these new technologies as if we can invent perpetual motion machines,” says Professor Roland Clift, a chemical engineer and former advisor to Defra on clean fuels. If an energy intensive process is required to turn biomass into fuel it may not be cost effective or environmentally beneficial to do so, he suggests.

Key questions:

• What changes must we make in order to comply with RTFO?
• What is the provenance of our available sources of biodiesel?
• How can we improve the efficiency of our road transport operations?