Showing posts with label milk. Show all posts
Showing posts with label milk. Show all posts

Thursday, 6 February 2020

Almonds are out. Dairy is a disaster. So what milk should we drink?

A glass of dairy milk produces almost three times more greenhouse gas than any plant-based milk. But vegan options have drawbacks of their own

For environmentally minded consumers, the news is hard to swallow: almond milk is not healthy for the planet and the popular milk substitute is especially hard on bees. Our recent investigation into the connection between California’s industrialized almond industry and a record 50bn commercial bee deaths created quite a buzz. The widely read story prompted one primary response from readers: “What should we be drinking instead?”

This is a thorny question, and food sustainability experts are reluctant to single out any one plant milk as best because all have pros and cons.
But we’re going to try.

One thing is clear. All milk alternatives are far better for the planet than dairy. A 2018 study by researchers at the University of Oxford showed that producing a glass of dairy milk results in almost three times more greenhouse gas emissions than any plant-based milk and it consumes nine times more land than any of the milk alternatives. (Land is required to pasture the cows and grow their feed, which the animals belch out in the form of methane.)

Plant milks can, nevertheless, have a dark side, as when any crop is produced in mass quantities. It’s important to consider not just whether they are grown using organic methods. Other factors include how the farming of the crop affects people and native habitats in developing countries, the carbon footprint and water use. And while each product has its trade-offs, some plant milks are more sustainable than others.
When choosing a plant milk, it’s important to consider how the crop impacts people and native habitats, along with its carbon footprint and water use. Photograph: Luigi Giordano/Getty Images/iStockphoto

Based on interviews with experts, here is a an environmental ranking of plant milks, from the disappointingly sour to the sustainably sweet.

Coconut: ‘An absolute tragedy’
Coconut has a reputation as exotic and healthy, but for poor regions in the Philippines, Indonesia and India, where pickers are often paid less than a dollar a day, the palm groves are no paradise.

Because coconut trees only grow in tropical climates, the pressure to meet global demand is causing exploitation of workers and destruction of rainforests. “Coconut is an absolute tragedy and it makes me really sad,” Isaac Emery, a food sustainability consultant. “I love cooking with coconut milk but I don’t feel good about buying coconut products. Farmers in Indonesia should be growing food to feed their families instead of meeting international demands.”

According to an investigation by the New York Times, between 2007 to 2014 rainforests in Indonesia were clearcut at the rate of three acres every minute to make way for coconut palm trees. To avoid supporting unsustainable practices, choose coconut products that are certified Fair Trade.

Almond: bad for bees
While almond trees occupy smaller amounts of farmland compared with other crops grown for milk, this benefit is overshadowed by the negative impacts of almond farming in the US. Concentrated almost entirely in California’s arid Central Valley, almonds are the largest specialty crop in the US and the orchards cover a region the size of Delaware.

Almonds require more water than any other dairy alternative, consuming 130 pints of water to produce a single glass of almond milk, according to the Oxford study. Satisfying continual demands for larger almond crops is also placing unsustainable pressures on US commercial beekeepers. Nearly 70% of commercial bees in the US are drafted every spring to pollinate almonds. Last year, a record number –over one-third of them– died by season’s end as a result of these pressures and other environmental threats.

Rice: a water-guzzler
Although rice milk is ubiquitous as an inexpensive and widely available dairy alternative, it offers little in the way of nutrition or environmental benefits compared with other choices.

Rice is a water hog, according to the Oxford study, plus it produces more greenhouse gas emissions than any other plant milk. Bacteria breeding in rice paddies pump methane into the atmosphere and large amounts of fertilizer pollute waterways.

Hazelnut: on the up
For consumers who want the nutritiousness and tastiness of a nut milk but without the environmental impacts of almond farming, the hazelnut is a rising star. Like all nuts, hazelnuts grow on trees that pull carbon from the atmosphere and help reduce greenhouse emissions rather than increase them. Hazelnuts are environmentally superior to almonds in that they are pollinated by the wind rather than commercial honeybees and they grow in moist climates, such as the Pacific north-west, where water is less of an issue.

Hemp and flax: niche contenders
Another way to ensure sustainable choices is to choose milk alternatives made from what Emery describes as “niche crops” such as hemp and flax. 

They are grown in relatively small quantities in the northern hemisphere, which makes them more environmentally friendly compared with a monoculture operation. Both plants produce seeds that make for a milk rich in protein and healthy fats.

Soy: back in favor
According to the Oxford study, soy milk is the joint winner on the sustainability scale. Plus, soy is the only plant milk that comes close to offering a protein content comparable to dairy. It was the go-to alternative long before almond milk came into vogue – but then soy fell out of favor.

“Soy has a relatively high concentration of certain hormones that are similar to human hormones and people got freaked out about that,” says Emery. “But the reality is you would have to consume an impossibly large amount of soy milk and tofu for that to ever be a problem.” Recent studies have instead found that a moderate amount of soy is healthy, especially for women.

The primary environmental drawback to soy milk is that soybeans are grown in massive quantities around the world to feed livestock for meat and dairy production. Large swaths of rainforest in the Amazon have been burned to make way for soy farms. The work-around for this is to simply do a little research and read the carton to find soy milk that is made from organic soybeans grown in the US or Canada.

Oat: a humble hero
Meet the winner: the unassuming oat.

“I’m excited about the surge in oat milk popularity,” says Liz Specht, associate director of science and technology for the Good Food Institute, a not-for-profit that promotes plant-based diets. “Oat milk performs very well on all sustainability metrics.” Also: “I highly doubt there will be unintended environmental consequences that might emerge when the scale of oat milk use gets larger.”

According to Bloomberg Business, retail sales of oat milk in the US have soared from $4.4m in 2017 to $29m in 2019, surpassing almond milk as the fastest-growing dairy alternative. But unlike almonds, there are already plenty of oats to go around. “Right now, 50 to 90% of global oat production goes into animal feed,” says Specht, “so there’s a huge existing acreage that we can safely steal share from without moving the needle at all on total production.”

Oats are grown in cooler climates such as the northern US and Canada, and are therefore not associated with deforestation in developing countries. The only drawback with this trendy and guilt-free option is that most oats come from mass-produced, monoculture operations where they are sprayed with the Roundup pesticide right before harvest. A study by the Environmental Working Group found glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup and a possible carcinogen, in all the foods it tested containing conventionally grown oats and even in one-third of products made with organic oats. However, the popular Oatly brand oat milk company maintains its oats are certified glyphosate free.

The bottom line: as long as it’s not dairy
Both Emery and Specht emphasize that whether it’s coconut, soy or oat, consumers should drink whatever plant milk is most appealing to them and not fret over sustainability shortcomings, which are chump change compared with the environmental harms from dairy.

“Drink what you want,” says Emery. “If you’re going with plant milk instead of animal milk, you’ve already addressed most of the environmental problems that your animal milk habit was causing.”


Source: The Guardian)

Monday, 13 January 2020

'Like sending bees to war': the deadly truth behind your almond-milk obsession

Bees are essential to the functioning of America’s titanic almond industry – and billions are dying in the process

Dennis Arp was feeling optimistic last summer, which is unusual for a beekeeper these days.

Thanks to a record wet spring, his hundreds of hives, scattered across the central Arizona desert, produced a bounty of honey. Arp would have plenty to sell in stores, but more importantly, the bumper harvest would strengthen his bees for their biggest task of the coming year.
Dennis Arp stands for a portrait near a colony of honeybees outside Rye, Arizona. Photograph: Caitlin O’Hara/The Guardian

Like most commercial beekeepers in the US, at least half of Arp’s revenue now comes from pollinating almonds. Selling honey is far less lucrative then renting out his colonies to mega-farms in California’s fertile Central Valley, home to 80% of the world’s almond supply.

But as winter approached, with Arp just months away from taking his hives to California, his bees started getting sick. By October, 150 of Arp’s hives had been wiped out by mites, 12% of his inventory in just a few months. “My yard is currently filled with stacks of empty bee boxes that used to contain healthy hives,” he says.

This shouldn’t be happening to someone like Arp, a beekeeper with decades of experience. But his story is not unique. Commercial beekeepers who send their hives to the almond farms are seeing their bees die in record numbers, and nothing they do seems to stop the decline.

A recent survey of commercial beekeepers showed that 50 billion bees – more than seven times the world’s human population – were wiped out in a few months during winter 2018-19. This is more than one-third of commercial US bee colonies, the highest number since the annual survey started in the mid-2000s.
Adam Arp, Dennis’s son, works outside Rye on 8 May 2019. Photograph: Caitlin O’Hara/The Guardian

Beekeepers attributed the high mortality rate to pesticide exposure, diseases from parasites and habitat loss. However, environmentalists and organic beekeepers maintain that the real culprit is something more systemic: 
America’s reliance on industrial agriculture methods, especially those used by the almond industry, which demands a large-scale mechanization of one of nature’s most delicate natural processes.

Honeybees thrive in a biodiverse landscape. But California’s almond industry places them in a monoculture where growers expect the bees to be predictably productive year after year.

Commercial honeybees are considered livestock by the US Department of Agriculture because of the creature’s vital role in food production. But no other class of livestock comes close to the scorched-earth circumstances that commercial honey bees face. More bees die every year in the US than all other fish and animals raised for slaughter combined.
Beehives stand stacked along a blooming almond orchard near Shafter, California. The bees pollinate many crops, including almond trees in February, and are essential to the food chain. Photograph: Ann Johansson/Corbis via Getty Images

“The high mortality rate creates a sad business model for beekeepers,” says Nate Donley, a senior scientist for the Center for Biological Diversity. “It’s like sending the bees to war. Many don’t come back.”

Nuts for almonds
California’s $11bn almond industry has grown at an extraordinary rate. In 2000, almond orchards occupied 500,000 acres. By 2018 that had more than doubled – almond groves in the Central Valley now blanket an area the size of Delaware, producing 2.3bn lb of almonds annually sold around the world.
The average American eats 2lb of almonds every year, more than in any other country. US almond milk sales have grown 250% over the past five years to reach $1.2bn, over four times that of any other plant-based milk, according to a 2018 Nielsen report.
Top: Dennis Arp works his hives outside Rye. 
Bottom: A colony of honeybees hard at work for Mountain Top Honey Company outside Rye.


“We don’t see a cap on growth at this point, especially with the incredible versatility of almonds in foods,” says Richard Waycott, president and CEO of the Almond Board of California, a not-for-profit advocacy organization representing the majority of farmers.

But these enormous orchards can’t function without bees.

It wasn’t that long ago that beekeeping was mostly a boutique pursuit of the gentleman apiarist. When European immigrants introduced their own version of agriculture to North America, they also imported the art of beekeeping, along with boxes of Apis mellifera, the domesticated European honeybee.
During the 19th and early 20th centuries, beekeepers earned a modest living selling beeswax and honey. But in the late 20th century there was a titanic shift, exemplified by the career of Dennis Arp.

Arp, 67, got into beekeeping nearly four decades ago when he established his Mountain Top Honey company in Flagstaff, Arizona. A commanding presence with biceps toned from hoisting heavy bee boxes, Arp is the sort of diligent beekeeper who spends his days driving between apiary sites, and his nights studying online forums, reading articles on the latest mite treatment.
An almond tree blooms near Visalia, in California. Photograph: Ann Johansson/Corbis via Getty Images

When cheap imported honey began cutting into Arp’s profits in the 1980s, he decided to send some of his hives with a beekeeper friend to pollinate almonds in California. A decade later he struck up a deal of his own with an almond grower in California’s Kern county. With that strategic move, Arp joined the growing ranks of migratory beekeepers in the US who still sell honey but mostly travel the country from one pollination site to the next with stacks of bee boxes in tow.

In the early 1980s, when Arp was just selling honey, he would lose about 5% of his hives per year to disease or weather conditions. Around 2000, Arp’s bees started dying in greater numbers.

First, he experienced a nearly 100% loss of his hives from an infestation of tracheal mites. Then he had to cope with the intrusion of Africanized “killer” bees. And finally, what he still considers the bane of his business, a parasitic mite called Varroa destructor, literally sucked the life out of his bees. The mite feeds on the bee’s plump body, destroying the insect’s immune system and other vital functions. If Arp doesn’t apply regular chemical treatments for the mites, his colonies will die.
Arp and his son Adam. Photograph: Caitlin O’Hara/The Guardian

Now Arp finds himself in a vicious circle: he is constantly battling to keep enough bees alive to meet the requirements of his almond contract. But if he was not pollinating almonds, maybe his bees would be healthier.

This year Arp’s bees, like more than two-thirds of the United States’ commercial honey bee population, will spend February in the toxic chemical soup of California’s Central Valley, fertilizing almonds one blossom at a time.
Pesticides are used for all kinds of crops across the state, but the almond, at 35m lb a year, is doused with greater absolute quantities than any other. One of the most widely applied pesticides is the herbicide glyphosate (aka Roundup), which is a staple of large-scale almond growers and has been shown to be lethal to bees as well as cause cancer in humans.

On top of the threat of pesticides, almond pollination is uniquely demanding for bees because colonies are aroused from winter dormancy about one to two months earlier than is natural. The sheer quantity of hives required far exceeds that of other crops – apples, America’s second-largest pollination crop, use only one-tenth the number of bees. And the bees are concentrated in one geographic region at the same time, exponentially increasing the risk of spreading sickness.
Top: Dennis Arp replaces queen bees in hives that rejected or were missing them outside Rye. Arp drove to California to purchase the new queens. 
Bottom: Honeybees working for Mountain Top Honey Company.


“Bees are exposed to all kinds of diseases in California,” says Arp. “There can be hundreds of thousands of hives from multiple beekeepers in one staging area. It is like letting your bees go into a singles bar and then they have unprotected sex.”

The almond business has been good to Arp – last February, for instance, he installed 1,500 of his hives in one grower’s orchard at $200 per hive – so he is reluctant to make a direct connection between the constant health challenges with his bees and the time spent every spring in the almond groves. “The bees like working on the almonds,” says Arp. “But it obviously exposes them to risks.”

Now he routinely loses 30% or more of his bees a year, mirroring national statistics. In any other industry, the death of a third of your workforce would cause an international outcry – but this staggering loss is now considered the normal cost of doing business.

“The bees in the almond groves are being exploited and disrespected,” says Patrick Pynes, an organic beekeeper who teaches environmental studies at Northern Arizona University in Flagstaff. “They are in severe decline because our human relationship to them has become so destructive.”

The high price of growth
When the phenomenon called colony collapse disorder was first identified in 2006, after a record number of honeybees mysteriously disappeared or died outside their hives, it was linked to a variety of factors including loss of habitat and climate change. But the primary culprit was pesticides. Researchers found that a class of pesticides called neonicotinoids was especially lethal to bees.
A smoker deters bees while Adam and Dennis Arp work on the hives. Photograph: Caitlin O’Hara/The Guardian

Last May, the EPA pulled a dozen “neonics” from the market following a successful lawsuit brought by beekeepers and environmental groups. 

But there are many chemicals that are not labeled as bee toxic, even though they can make bees sick and weaken their immune systems. While bees may survive the pollination season, they may not last the winter or may take back substances that gradually poison the entire colony.

Those on the almond growers’ side acknowledge there is a huge problem. “The bee mortality rate is too high and is unacceptable,” says the entomologist Bob Curtis, a pollination consultant for the Almond Board of California. “It is only because of the hard work and creativity of beekeepers that [almond growers] have gotten the bees they need.”

The almond board’s “best practice” guidelines encourage beekeepers to spend as little time in California’s Central Valley as possible. Honeybees can travel up to three miles in search of varied forage, so even if the almond grower is doing everything right to protect a pollination investment, the cotton or grape farmer down the road may be spraying bee-toxic chemicals on crops.

Even as almond production has steadily ramped up for decades, the number of commercial hives in the US has remained at a steady 2.7m colonies since the early 2000s. With all the challenges beekeepers face, just maintaining the bare minimum is a struggle.

One coping strategy pursued by the almond industry has been to develop genetically modified almond varieties that require only one hive per acre to pollinate, instead of two. And last January, a pollinator protection law went into effect in California as part of the state’s “Bee Where” initiative. For this program, beekeepers are required to register the location of their hives with the county’s agricultural commissioner and farmers must notify the commissioner in advance of any plans to spray pesticides.

Even so, the costs beekeepers incur trying to keep their bees alive are constantly rising. Arp has spent approximately $50,000 in the past year buying new hives to compensate for the 35% colony loss he experienced last year. He also spends at least $50,000 a year on mite treatments, not to mention other more aggressive measures the industry is taking just to maintain the status quo. These include splitting robust hives in half, introducing mail-order queens to new hives and fattening bees on corn syrup or on simulated pollen substances called “pollen patties”.

Experts say that simply working around the pesticide problem isn’t enough and that farming itself must be changed from the ground up.

The search for a solution
Hope is being found in a new certification program that, similar to “organic” or “free trade” labels, will help consumers choose products that have been made with bee-friendly methods.

The “Bee Better” certification program, launched in 2017 by the not-for-profit Xerces Society, introduces biodiversity into almond groves to naturally control pests and nourish honey bees. Xerces is working with almond growers to plant California wildflowers, mustard and clover in between the rows of trees and native flowering hedges along the perimeter of the orchard – a kind of eco-friendly fence to keep bees in the orchard.

The program scored a victory when Häagen-Dazs ice cream became the first food company to carry products with the Bee Better seal. The company’s bee-friendly vanilla milk chocolate almond bar was rolled out in December at Costco, Sam’s Club and BJ’s Wholesale Club, with three more bee-friendly almond ice cream flavors to be available in early 2020.

Letting nature take its course is nothing new for 81-year old Glenn Anderson. He is the first and still one of the few organic almond growers in California’s San Joaquin Valley. His 40-year-old orchard is small – just 20 acres – and has always been chemical free.

“We don’t have pests; we have biodiversity,” says Anderson, who primarily sells directly to individual customers through his Anderson Almonds company. 

Unlike large industrial almond farms that strip the orchard ground bare to more efficiently treat for insects and fungi, Anderson allows a rich understory to grow, which naturally nourishes the soil and strengthens the trees.

Anderson hires a “beekeeper hobbyist” from northern California every spring to install about 20 hives in his orchard. “We have the opposite of colony collapse at my farm,” says Anderson. “My beekeeper brings weak hives down that he wants to recharge on my property.”

Anderson says the tradeoff for not using pesticides is that his annual crop yield is lower – typically about 10,000 pounds – and he keeps his orchard small in order to manage its wildness. “I’m averse to an expansion model,” he says. “It doesn’t suit me much.”

And as for industrial-grown almonds? “They taste like cardboard,” he says.
Back in Arizona, Dennis Arp and his son Adam are just trying to make it through the next few months with as many healthy bees as possible.

There are days when the costs seem overwhelming, and Arp wonders if he should hang up his honey-stained bee suit. But beekeeping is what he knows best, and he wants to pass the business on to his son.

“I don’t know how we will pull it off yet,” he says. “But we will make it work.”


(Source: The Guardian)

Tuesday, 19 November 2019

Spilt milk

I am four months a mother, a fact proclaimed by my son’s age. We will be forever tethered to each other by time, two hands on a clock. I don’t think much about this until after birth.

I am four months a mother and have returned to work and need to pump every few hours. This is not only to have milk the babysitter can bottle-feed to Oliver, not only to relieve pain in my chest or avoid clogged ducts and infection. I need to pump because without a baby constantly at my breast, my supply will dry up and I won’t be able to feed my son at all. My blind body accepts that the robotic suction is a hungry baby’s mouth.

I am four months a mother when I call my mother for help. I work as a college application essay specialist in the suburban county where I grew up, an hour away from where I live with my husband and son. It is the community in which my father teaches, though he now lives with a new partner in Manhattan. It is the community in which my divorced, single mother still resides.

I have called my mother because I can’t figure out how to be a professional while breastfeeding. Where to pump? I tell her I had an academic job interview in New Jersey two weeks before and didn’t feel comfortable asking my would-be boss if there was a place to relieve full breasts and so wound up in the bathroom of a pizzeria by the train station. Pumping sessions take at least twenty minutes and I tell her how the customers knocked and then banged on the door, and that I emerged into a cluster of disapproving eye-rolls and head wags. Last week, I say, I pumped in my parked car, but it turns out that disrobing in daylight and affixing plastic shields and tubes to your breasts while your nipples are visibly tugged and squeezed unnerves passersby.

I have four clients on Tuesday afternoon, I say, and each session is an hour long, and my body will need relief. I have nowhere to go.

*

I am four months a mother and my tutorial work-spaces are dining tables lit by chandeliers and kitchen tables strewn with bills. All of my bosses are mothers. They are the ones who hire me, the ones who pay me, the ones who worry over the phone about their children’s futures.

My roster of students includes a teenager whose father died in a terrorist attack. He doesn’t remember much—he was little—but is regularly told how much he looks and sounds and acts like his father. I gnaw the fleshy inside of my cheek as he describes what it feels like to wear his father’s face. How agonizing it must be for his mother, I think, to watch her son grow into her late husband. Or maybe, I think, how beautiful. I am four months a mother and want to hug the woman in the other room, widowed in the most heinous and violent way, sole parent to a child who will depend on her for everything, and I feel the pressure in my chest—all grief and fluid and fear—when I tell her, insufficiently, that I am sorry.

*

I ask Mom, “Can I come by after my second tutoring? To pump?”

She is quiet, says, “To my house?”

Her house was once our house. It is the house in which I grew up, from the age of two until I left for college. I am four months a mother and still unused to the pronoun: my. I suck on it like an ice cube. It anesthetizes my tongue.

The second-floor bedroom with the fuzzy blue carpet bears all my marks. Faint dots on the walls from sticky tack that held up posters of my paramours: Bon Jovi and Eddie Vedder. A wooden desk in whose drawer I scratched my initials. The twin bed I hid beneath when home alone, petrified of any ghostly noise I discerned. Beside it is the radio to which I pressed my ear long after I should’ve been asleep to hear Love Lines on Z100, so eager to find out what men wanted. That’s the mattress on which I applied what I learned.

In the closet: stiff Archie comics and letters from sleepaway camp and ballet slippers that belonged to a beloved friend who died in fifth grade and the mustard-colored safe I received for Hanukkah and into which I stuffed Zima and clove cigarettes. Also: a swirly painting of a fetus in utero I made for Mom one Mother’s Day in junior high and snatched back in high school when I found it in the attic. I had wanted her to hang it up. I was always so full of wanting.

“Yes,” I tell my mother. “I want to come to your house.” She has kept my room more or less intact. With four other bedrooms, she doesn’t need the space.

“I have an appointment,” she says, “I won’t be here.” The implication: if she’s not there, I can’t be either.

“It’s not personal,” she says when I protest, which I do repeatedly.

She had the locks changed after Dad moved out seven years prior and won’t give keys to anyone—not her children or the neighbors or the cleaning lady. Nor will she order anything off the internet or leave her dog tied up outside a store or record her own voice on the answering machine. Fear is an omnivore.

Her decision is not personal, but I feel it in my person. In the seize of my stomach. In the curl of my toes. In the gash that appears when I tear my thumb with my teeth.

I say, “Don’t you trust me?”

“Yes,” she says, “but this is what makes me comfortable.” Her words are another locked door. There’s no way through, no explanation beyond. Five years earlier, during a difficult stretch in our relationship, one of her friends had taken me aside: can your mother do anything to show that she trusts you, besides giving you a house key?

I’d answered too readily: no.

*

I am four months a mother and my mother is four months a grandmother and she visits us often in Brooklyn. She will become the grandma who laughs the loudest, who attends birthday parties and piano recitals, whose pocketbook produces gag gifts, as it did in my youth—whoopee cushions and Groucho Marx glasses and gummy eyeballs. She is the woman who made me into an artist, the one who will encourage my children’s creativity, too. Still, she didn’t breastfeed, and can’t appreciate why I’m so committed. What’s the big deal about formula? she asks often. Plenty of mothers use formula and their kids are fine.

*

I am four months a mother and it is winter in New York and everything is a shade of shadow: the sky, the trees, the street. At a long, narrow dining table, I work with a student on an essay about adventuring while a dog sleeps at my feet. This sixteen-year-old hiked Mount Rainier to watch the sunrise, scuba dived in Belize, chased fresh powder on the steepest slopes. I like to take risks, he tells me, to feel adrenaline in my veins. How undaunted he seems. How intrepid. As we say goodbye, I wonder if this makes his mother nervous.

I set out toward my childhood home, and am quickly unsettled by how lonesome it seems. The mammoth maple I used to climb, centerpiece of our front yard, contracted a disease and croaked. The grass is patchy and frosted. A shingle has slipped off the roof. I zip into the driveway, the same driveway my grandpa, my mother’s father, would glide into in his Cadillac on Sundays, unannounced. If my father answered and we kids weren’t home, my grandpa would leave without saying hello to my mother. I’d hear about this afterward. Sometimes I’d find her crying. My whole childhood I watched her crave her parents’ attention and affection. I never saw them kiss her, never heard them say I love you. How does one learn to give if one has not received?

After a few days of pleading—“Let me think about it,” she said on Sunday; “I’m figuring out how this would work,” she said on Monday—my mother has agreed to leave a key, so long as I return it to its hiding place before I go. I shut off the car and decide this is a meaningful gesture. Maybe, since I’m four months a mother and she’s four months a grandmother, it signifies a shift. Maybe she will get increasingly comfortable loaning out the key and eventually offer me one to keep.

I will be wrong about this. She won’t leave the key again. In fact on a future visit, when Oliver is three and I have a new infant, we will arrive earlier than planned and Mom won’t be home yet and Oliver will have to poop and he will do so in the woods beside the house—her house. Mom, when she finally arrives, will try to downplay it, will say “It’s like camp!” but what will pass over her face for just a second, a cloud eclipsing the sun, will be regret. Mom cannot help this web of distrust, never meant for it to ensnare us all.

Today, though, when I am four months a mother, I have access for the first and last time. I follow her instructions: step behind a bush near the side door, locate the green watering can and the slate tile beneath it and the plastic bag beneath that, inside of which is the key. Bingo! I rub the metal between my fingers. It is thicker than any others I’ve seen. Heavier, too. More difficult to duplicate.

My breasts hurt. I slide the key into lock and the teeth bite and I push open the door into one of the most familiar physical spaces I know, all blonde wood and whimsical tchotchkes, and also the most familiar sound: a beeping alarm. Blood glugs in my gut. This wasn’t supposed to happen. At the keypad, I punch in the numbers I remember from childhood but they don’t register—of course they don’t register, because my mother has not only changed the locks, she has changed the code. I try her birthday, try all ones, something easy because Mom has a fragile memory, try numbers in a row and numbers in a square and the buttons squish under my sweaty fingers and the system now assumes that I’m an unwelcome visitor, a thief, a criminal, and all at once the volume swells and a siren wails and a mechanized voice explodes through the wall: You have violated a protected area! The police were called! Leave immediately!

I fumble for my phone, call my mother, plug the other ear. No answer.

A lactating body is sensitive to sound. It assumes loud noise is a wailing, hungry baby, and responds in kind: my breasts bulge and harden and cramp.

It is 3:15. I have to be at the next student’s house at 3:45. The only way my milk will let down is if I’m relaxed. I am not relaxed. Prickles of panic climb my arms. I cannot take a deep breath. Amid the earsplitting distress signal and robotic commands—Leave! Immediately!—I withdraw the plastic funnels and valves and membranes and tubes from my bag and pull off my shirt and swap my nursing bra for a strapless bra designed to hold these parts in place. I fasten two small eight-ounce bottles, one to each side.

The phone on the wall rings, nearly inaudible inside the tumult. An officer. He needs to ensure I’m a resident and not an intruder. He asks for the secret password. I do not have the secret password. So many ways to be walled out.

“I’m the daughter,” I shout. I say, “childhood home.” I say, “misunderstanding.” My breasts deliver one fat drop apiece. I cannot bear to watch.

The officer will be dispatching someone to the property, he says. Protocol.

Six minutes until the police arrive. I know this from childhood. I sit at the kitchen table, in the same chair I occupied for our family meals. The table at which my father tutored after school and on weekends, all yellow legal pads and chewed Bic pen caps, a space as insignificant to his students as my students’ kitchens are to me.

Taped to the wall to my right: a vertical poster that reads EAT EAT EAT until the bottom prong of the final E disappears as if into a mouth and EAT becomes FAT. A sign that sapped pleasure out of every childhood bite and once caused an overweight friend to burst into tears. A mantra that befit my mother’s restrictive diet and my grandmother’s, too, that evoked the one time I ever recall Grandma coming over for lunch—how she removed from her purse a single hard-boiled egg, which she placed in the center of her plate. “This is all I need,” she said. Later, in adulthood, I will think: even their lips were locked.

One ounce per bottle. Oliver eats six ounces per meal. I need more time. More air. More mercy. I pull up baby pictures on my phone, all huge eyes and cheeks and toothless gums. EAT EAT LIVE.

The alarm’s an electric current. Violated! It vibrates the hairs on my arms, swings the papier-mâché parrot hanging from the ceiling, threatens to dislodge the Post-its affixed to my mother’s fridge. Protected! See my family assembled around the counter there? It’s Friday night, Shabbat, and we’ve lit a ceramic candelabra on whose base is a miniature Adam and Eve and a demonic red snake. My mother is baking honeyed apples and the air is sweet and warm, and we’re taking turns expressing gratitude, saying nice things we did that week—I told Nicki I liked her dress, I say—and my father puts his hands on my mother’s bowed head—Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the Universe—and my siblings and I poke our faces into the tent their bodies make. Home.

One siren overwhelms the other. A cruiser has pulled up alongside my car in the driveway, and red and blue lights swirl around the kitchen. I shut off the pump and disassemble the parts and quickly pull on my shirt.

Two white, male officers are framed in the doorway, a sight that would have made me panic as a teenager, would’ve induced guilt even if I’d done nothing wrong. How many times I’d tumbled through this door drunk or high or in the aftermath of making out, convinced my parents would smell me, would know.

“Sorry,” I shout. “No emergency.” I feel heat in my bra. “I’m the homeowner’s daughter,” I say. My left breast, the more prolific one, has sprung a leak. A dark blossom unfurls on my shirt. I cross my arms. One of the men asks how to spell my name, writes it down. My mom was supposed to leave the house unarmed, I say. I don’t say she was supposed to do this because she wasn’t comfortable giving me the code. I don’t say, It’s not personal.

My phone vibrates. “Oh, shit,” Mom says when she hears what’s happening. “Shit, shit.” I hand her to a cop.

*

I will pack up my stuff in haste—already late for the next appointment—and won’t properly affix the bottle caps. On the drive home that night, I will simmer and fizz and yearn. When I arrive in Brooklyn, the base of my bag will be sticky and damp, the bottles empty.

(Source: The Paris Review) 

Monday, 29 April 2019

Milkmen are returning to London as millennials order glass milk bottles in a bid to slash plastic waste

The catalyst for the surge in millennials using glass bottles is David Attenborough's Blue Planet II, according to one milkman

Milkmen and milkwomen are making a comeback in London as millennials have started using glass milk bottles in a bid to cut down plastic waste.

Dairies in the capital told of a "phenomenal" upsurge in interest from younger customers at the start of the year amid growing public upset over plastic waste.

Both UK-wide company milk&more and east London dairy Parker Dairies have seen increased demand for glass bottles in 2018, citing David Attenborough's Blue Planet II as the "catalyst" for the new uptake.

The firms said younger consumers and families seem willing to pay more for the service in a bid to help the environment.

It comes amid conflicting reports of a resurgence in glass doorstep deliveries in the UK.

While it was reported there was a 25 per cent hike in the number of deliveries in the UK over the last two years, Dairy UK told the Standard it could not confirm the figure.

The industry body said figures showed doorstep deliveries make up 3 per cent of milk sales in the UK – around 1 million pints per day – and glass milk bottles make up 3 per cent of all milk sales.

But depot manager of Parker Dairies Paul Lough said interest of late in glass bottles has been “absolutely phenomenal”.

Parker Dairies: the east London dairy has a fleet of 25 electric milk floats (Parker Dairies)
He said the dairy, which has a fleet of 25 electric milk floats covering all of east London, the city and the West End, has gained 382 new customers since the beginning of the year.

Of these new calls, 95 per cent are having milk delivered in glass bottles.

Mr Lough said: “Before Christmas we were taking 30 calls a month, and since New Year we are getting 30 calls a week.”

The dairy has seen a 4 per cent increase in sales since December, with an extra 1800 pints being sold each week.

Mr Lough attributed the new interest to the "regeneration" of the East End since the Olympics.

"People are much more environmentally conscious and so they are asking if we do glass,” he said.

And the dairy has attracted a younger clientele, Mr Lough said, meaning the firm has expanded its product line to cater to the new demographic.

“Without a doubt [they are younger],” he said. “That is why we are trying to change our product list.

“We do sourdough and honeys… we sell 250 loaves a week to new customers.”

Glass milk bottles can be reused up to 25 times before they are recycled into new bottles (Parker Dairies)
Meanwhile, UK company milk&more said it has gained more than 2,500 new customers in the last month – the equivalent of five new milk rounds.

And some 90 per cent of these customers across the country are ordering in the iconic glass bottles.

In London, milk&more has added the equivalent of a whole new round, the company said.

The company – which occupies Hanworth Dairy in south west London - was bought by dairy giant Müller from Dairy Crest in 2016, which pledged to save glass milk bottle doorstep delivery and boost the service.

Dairy Crest had planned to shut down the dairy and review milk&more in light of declining interest in milk deliveries, with plans to phase out glass bottles.

But Müller said it wanted to reverse the plans and “rejuvenate and expand” milk&more.

Milkman Ian Beardwell has been doing the same round in Wimbledon for Hanworth Dairy for 27 years.

He said: “Since Blue Planet that has been the catalyst of the revival in glass.

Dairies offer locally sourced produced such as sourdough bread alongside milk
“I used to do 550 calls before and in four weeks I’ve gained another 35 to 40 calls – 90 per cent glass.

“The trend for new customers has always been to come on board with plastic. But I have always done glass. I think they forgot that I do glass… people just didn’t realise.

“One lady has just come back to me in the last four weeks. I hadn’t been delivering to her for the last 10 years. She told me she just got lazy.”

Patrick Müller, managing director of milk&more, said: “The glass bottle is an exciting product… we think that it has a future.

“We believe the tradition of the milkman has some fantastic elements that are relevant now. They are a reliable presence for pre-breakfast delivery, they offer an exciting product range including locally sourced produce, and can be a part of the community.

“We just have to make them relevant for the modern consumer.” 

He said new customers were aged around 35 years old, coming from young families with a double income.

Mr Muller added: “It’s popular with families, so people that care about the local community and local produce.

“They want the story behind their produce but they don’t have the time to get it.

“We talked with customers and they said they enjoy the experience of the glass bottle - the childhood memories - and they want to reduce their plastic wastage.”

(Source: Evening Standard)

Friday, 5 April 2019

Can the world quench China’s bottomless thirst for milk?

China’s leaders have championed milk as the emblem of a modern, affluent society – but their radical plan to triple the nation’s consumption will have a huge environmental cost.

Beijing-based film-maker Jian Yi, now 43, clearly remembers the arrival of fresh milk in his life. It was an image of it, not the real thing. “It was the 1990s, and I first saw it in an advert on TV. The ad said explicitly that drinking milk would save the nation. It would make China stronger and better able to survive competition from other nations.”

Like most ethnic Han, who make up about 95% of the population, Jian was congenitally lactose-intolerant, meaning milk was hard to digest. His parents did not consume dairy at all when they were growing up; China’s economy was closed to the global market and its own production very limited. Throughout the Mao era, milk was in short supply and rationed to those deemed to have a special need: infants and the elderly, athletes and party cadres above a certain grade. Through most of the imperial dynasties until the 20th century, milk was generally shunned as the slightly disgusting food of the barbarian invaders. Foreigners brought cows to the port cities that had been ceded to them by the Chinese in the opium wars of the 19th century, and a few groups such as Mongolian pastoralists used milk that was fermented, but it was not part of the typical Chinese diet.

As China opened up to the market in the 1980s, after Mao’s death, dried milk powder began appearing in small shops where you could buy it with state-issued coupons. Jian’s parents bought it for him because they thought it would make him stronger. “It was expensive, I didn’t like it, I was intolerant, but we persuaded ourselves it was the food of the future,” he said. “You have to understand the psychology here – there is a sense in China that we have been humiliated ever since the opium wars, but that now we are no longer going to be humiliated by foreign powers.”

When the People’s Republic of China was born in 1949, its national dairy herd was said to consist of a mere 120,000 cows. Yet today, China is the third-largest milk producer in the world, estimated to have around 13m dairy cows, and the average person has gone from barely drinking milk at all to consuming about 30kg of dairy produce a year.

In a little over 30 years, milk has become the emblem of a modern, affluent society and a country able to feed its people. The transition has been driven by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), for which milk is not just food, but a key strategic tool. The party’s claim to a monopoly on power is based on the principles of socialism. As it has tempered that socialist ideology with elements of a market economy, the legitimacy of the one-party state has instead depended on delivering the capitalist promise of increasing material wealth. The fact that people can afford animal produce is a visible symbol of the party’s success. Making animal produce, particularly milk, available to everyone across the country is a way of tackling potentially destabilising inequalities that have arisen as China has developed between the big cities and some of the poorest rural areas. In the poorest regions, nearly one in five children are still stunted, or short for their age, from lack of adequate nutrition.

Photograph: Sean Gallagher/The Guardian

The party’s current, 13th five-year plan identifies one of its top priorities as shifting from small-scale herds to larger industrial factory farms to keep its population of 1.4 billion in milk. Official guidelines on diet recommend people eat triple the amount of dairy foods that they typically consume currently.

President Xi Jinping has talked in speeches about making a “new China man”. In 2014, he visited a factory owned by China’s largest dairy processor, Yili, and exhorted its workers to produce good, safe, dairy products. That new China man is expected to be a milk-drinker.

The reinvention of milk as a staple of modern China has required a series of remarkable feats, not least of which was to overcome the people’s lactose-intolerance and create a market for milk where there had been none. It has involved privatising farming, allowing processing companies to become corporations, and even converting desert areas into giant factory farms.

Now the global impact of China’s ever-expanding dairy sector is causing concern in other countries. Dairy farming requires access to vast quantities of fresh water: it takes an estimated 1,020 litres of water to make one litre of milk. But China suffers from water scarcity, and has been buying land and water rights abroad, as well as establishing large-scale processing factories in other countries.

Farmed animals are also one of the most significant causes of man-made climate change. Livestock currently account for about 14.5% of the world’s total greenhouse gas emissions, more than the entire global transportation sector. Cattle account for more than two-thirds of those livestock emissions. Ruminants have a disproportionate impact because their digestion releases vast quantities of methane, a particularly potent greenhouse gas, and their excreta produces nitrous oxide. On top of that, large areas of forest are being cleared to make more land available for crops to feed farm animals, releasing carbon dioxide. China already imports 60% of the total volume of soyabeans traded worldwide, to make the high-protein feed it needs. Its demand for soya is a major driver of deforestation of the Amazon and Brazilian savanna. Delivering milk across long distances to urban supermarkets produces yet more emissions.

According to a study by academics in China and the Netherlands, if Chinese milk consumption grows as forecast, using its current farming methods, the global emissions from dairy production alone will increase by 35% and the land needed to feed cows for China would have to increase by 32% in the next 30 years. China’s ambitions to triple its milk consumption “will have major global consequences”, according to the study’s lead Dutch researcher, Gerard Velthof. China’s own capacity to produce more is limited by its lack of resources. So, if the additional milk to meet demand in China were mostly imported, we would have to find two new countries the size of Ireland and give them over completely to producing feed just for cows milked either in or for China.

Jian believes China’s new obsession with milk took hold with the 1984 Olympic Games in Los Angeles. When he made a documentary about food in China a decade ago, he interviewed people of his parents’ generation, who repeatedly mentioned watching the games. New mass ownership of television sets had allowed Chinese people to see real foreigners, as opposed to actors, live on TV for the first time. “It made a huge impression on people,” Jian recalled. “They were amazed to see how strong and tall foreigners were. They could jump twice as far, run twice as fast. They concluded that Americans ate a lot of beef and drank a lot of milk and Chinese people needed to catch up.”

Chinese state planners were also impressed by the way the Japanese had developed. When the US defeated and occupied Japan after the second world war, they had introduced feeding programmes in Japanese schools to give children milk and eggs. Average heights increased within one generation.

By 1984, Deng Xiaoping’s market reforms, which had begun just a few years earlier in December 1978, were ushering in a period of unprecedented economic growth. GDP increased an average of about 10% a year until 2010. The first phase of reforms ended collective farming in agriculture, opened industries up to foreign investment, and allowed individuals to start businesses. A new “household responsibility programme” allowed families to farm individual plots of land and sell surplus for profit once again. These smallholders were encouraged to keep a few cattle for milk to increase their income while boosting domestic supplies. The effect was dramatic. The amount of food produced rose rapidly and, over the next two decades, would grow by an average of 4.5% a year.

As populations urbanise, they have always moved up the food chain, making the transition from diets largely based on grains and vegetable staples to ones in which meat, dairy, fats and sugars feature more prominently. China has followed the same trajectory. Dairy consumption grew rapidly through the 1980s and early 90s. The western model of retailing based on supermarkets with longer supply chains arrived in cities, too, making it possible for producers to distribute milk further and easy for shoppers to buy it.

As incomes increased, people could afford refrigerators in their homes and wanted milk to put in them. For factory employees working long hours, dairy foods represented a convenient way to get nutrients without having to cook. Technology to produce UHT milk with longer sell-by dates, imported in the late 90s, gave consumption a further boost. Since fermenting milk helps break down lactose, new yoghurt products were also marketed to overcome lactose-intolerance.

 Cartons of imported milk for sale in a supermarket in Beijing. Photograph: Sean Gallagher/The Guardian
From the mid-80s on, a number of leading dairy transnationals such as Fonterra, Nestlé, Danone and Arla made major investments in China to grow their brands there. Chinese dairy processors, supported by the state and with access to new foreign capital, also spent millions – creating demand through advertising first, and then looking to meet supply second. The arrival of western-style fast foods such as McDonald’s in the early 90s brought cheese into the everyday Chinese diet. The end of the decade saw Starbucks opening in Beijing and western-style coffee-shop culture take off, making milk fashionable. Milk represented modernity, progress and the rise of China.

By the end of the 90s, the eastern cities of China were booming, and people were consuming more dairy foods, but a gap was growing between there and the interior, where people were much poorer and still drank little milk. The state began new campaigns to make farming more efficient and to speed up overall development in the less prosperous western regions. Promoting the industrial-scale farming of intensively fed cows in new hi-tech facilities in Inner Mongolia was part of that push for modernisation.

The party’s five-year plans, from the late 90s on, introduced a raft of supports for dairy businesses. The state facilitated loans to farm companies to buy cows, gave processing companies tax breaks and issued tens of millions in national debt funds to improve breeding stock and milking and packaging facilities. China’s accession to the World Trade Organisation in 2001 gave the dairy trade a further boost. The drive for dairy was highly effective. In 1990, urban Chinese were consuming about 4kg of dairy produce on average a year. By 2005, that had skyrocketed to 18kg per person per year. In the countryside, consumption lagged, but in that same period it nevertheless rose from 1kg per person per year to nearly 3kg. Inner Mongolia became the leading source of milk and now accounts for a quarter of the country’s total dairy production.

To spread the milk habit further, the state set about creating new generations of dairy consumers. Babies are born with the capacity to make lactase, the enzyme needed to digest the lactose in milk, but generally lose it when they are weaned in infancy. East Asian people are also genetically predisposed to lactase-deficiency. Older generations of Chinese, whose diet has not featured dairy produce, are mostly intolerant of lactose, but if infants never stopped drinking milk, they could maintain some capacity to produce lactase and avoid suffering the bloating that put people off it.

So health professionals in vaccination clinics were trained to tell parents to feed their children milk. The state initiated a school milk programme in 2000 to give a daily cup of free milk to urban children, and later extended it to rural areas. Premier Wen Jiabao visited a dairy farm in 2006 and wrote that he had a dream that everyone in China, and especially children, should have one jin (or 500g) of milk a day. New official nutrition guidelines were issued recommending more milk and dairy foods in the diet.

Drinking milk was deliberately associated with athletic prowess and national pride. Yili, which has its headquarters in Hohhot, where the local Inner Mongolian state is a shareholder with significant control, was designated official partner and supplier of milk to the Olympics in 2008. Its slogan was: “With me, China is strong.”

Mengniu, China’s second-largest dairy producer, is also a state-controlled private enterprise based in Inner Mongolia. It has spent millions sponsoring televised sport, as well as China’s version of Pop Idol and the Chinese space programme. It was an official sponsor of the 2018 football World Cup, and its advertisements were ubiquitous during matches, with the unforgettable slogan: “Power of nature, born for greatness.”

Jian’s parents now drink milk regularly, although he has himself become vegan. Concerned about climate change and animal welfare, he runs the China Good Food Fund, a project to promote sustainable food. “My mother has diabetes and has been told to diet, but the doctors say she must still have milk to make her strong,” he said. “The Chinese have learned to drink milk in the same way that they learned to drink Coca-Cola. Cola seemed weird at first, it tasted odd, it was brown, it had horrible bubbles … milk was the same, but we were drinking something in our imagination; we were drinking the western lifestyle, what was modern,” he told me.

It seemed as though nothing could stop the inexorable rise of milk in China, but then scandal struck. In 2008, after a decade of explosive growth, it emerged that raw milk from 22 dairy companies, including Yili, Mengniu and many other leading processors, had been adulterated with melamine, an industrial chemical used in plastics. It had been added to watered-down milk to cheat the protein tests on which the price paid to farmers was based. The melamine combined with uric acid to make kidney stones, which cause acute damage to the urinary tract, and excruciating pain, particularly in babies and young children. Nearly 300,000 children across mainland China suffered serious illness. Six babies died. Tens of millions of infants had to be checked by doctors as their parents panicked about their safety. Sales of Chinese milk collapsed overnight.

Top executives from one large processing company, Sanlu, turned out to have known about the adulteration for months but had covered it up, paying for internet search engines to censor negative reports about its products. While the 2008 Beijing Olympics was projecting a positive image of modern China, local officials delayed reporting the crime to higher authorities. It was the New Zealand dairy giant Fonterra, which had a 43% shareholding in Sanlu, that blew the whistle to its own government, eventually forcing the Chinese authorities to act. Sanlu became the focus of enforcement: its managers were prosecuted and jailed, a farmer and middleman were tried and executed. Fonterra had to write off NZ$139m (£71m) of investment. Most of the blame, however, was put on small farmers and largely unregulated middlemen who collected milk from communal milking stations.

The state has since made sweeping changes to safety regulation and tightened inspection. There have, however, been repeated food scares linked to contaminated milk and other products in recent years. Consumers remain deeply suspicious about the safety of local food, fearing adulteration, residues from the overuse of agrochemicals, toxins from the pollution of ground water and air by industrial waste and excessive use of antibiotics. Many affluent parents still only buy foreign brands of milk for their young children.

When it was imposing its one-child policy, the CCP made a social compact with the people: while family size might be limited, the state would make sure that each couple’s treasured offspring would be as strong as it could make them. In the 2000s, feeding children milk took on great importance in maintaining the policy.

In the hutong – the narrow alleys of old Beijing, with their traditional single-storey courtyard houses and communal public toilets – one often sees clusters of three or four ageing grandparents playing with a single small child whose parents are out at work. A grandmother in her 60s shopping in Jinkelong supermarket chain told us she bought milk everyday for her grandchild. The child’s parents did not drink cow’s milk, but soya milk instead, while she herself did not drink it at all because she was lactose-intolerant, but she thought it was good for the child to build his strength and physical development. Did she feel confident it was safe, after the melamine scandal? She laughed and said: “No, but I choose the bigger brands and I switch between them a lot; so if we’re being poisoned at least we are not storing up one kind.”

Since the melamine scandal, imports of foreign milk powder have soared. To stop agents buying too much milk powder for resale in China, shops in Australia imposed bans on bulk purchases of infant formula. New Zealand has also had periods of rationing formula. BHG, an upmarket Beijing supermarket in a shopping mall near an affluent residential area, had prominent displays of UHT and milk powder brands from Germany and New Zealand, along with gift packs of small cartons in luxury packaging. The fresh milk on display made much of being pure, sourced from Inner Mongolia with its bright green pastures.

The China Shengmu Organic Dairy in Inner Mongolia. Photograph: Jeff Zhou/CIWF
To rebuild confidence in Chinese produce, the state has accelerated the industrialisation of production and investment in large-scale farms. Before the scandal, 70% of dairy farmers in China had herds of 20 or fewer cows. Six years after, the number of small herds had dropped to 43% and industrial units with more than 1,000 head of cattle accounted for nearly 20% of the dairy farms. Smallholders were encouraged to move their cattle into special designated zones – known as “cow hotels” – with expert technicians on hand. At the same time, the state imposed tough licensing on farmers, forcing many with smaller herds out of dairy production altogether.

Last October, I was taken to one model operation in Inner Mongolia that shows the trend towards hi-tech, more intensive farming. The China Shengmu Organic Dairy was first conceived in 2009 as a response to the melamine poisoning scandal, and as a pioneering experiment in tackling environmental problems. The company is an example of the close relationship between private enterprise and state that characterises the socialist country’s engagement with capitalism. Farmland was nationalised under Mao and remains in state control. The local Mongolian state allowed Shengmu to rent land and was involved in negotiating rights with nomads and local farmers, some of whom now work with its livestock, its manager Yan Shengmao told me. Its founding directors were executives from Mengniu. They were given the go-ahead by state regulators for a public offering on the Hong Kong stock exchange in 2014, and fresh capital flowed in from foreign and Chinese state banks and private equity investors. The idea was to test the market for a higher-quality, more expensive sort of home-grown production.

Despite Inner Mongolia’s pastoral image, which is a big selling point in milk advertising, the traditional nomad herder way of life has been decimated over decades by overgrazing, by policies of compulsory settlement, enclosure and relocation, and by industrial development. The region’s grasslands are now severely degraded, grazing is restricted, and the Gobi desert is encroaching. But in part of the region’s Ulan Buher desert, thanks to irrigation from the Yellow River and 90m recently planted trees, what was a landscape of giant sand dunes less than a decade ago has been turned by Shengmu into a farm for up to 100,000 Holstein cows, kept in 23 industrial units housing 5,000-10,000 each. Most of Shengmu’s cows have been bred from US stock, whose advanced genetic selection makes them very high-yielding. It is a confined animal feeding operation (CAFO), meaning the cows do not graze outdoors on pasture – even if it were available, such breeds are at the limit of their physiology and could not keep up with their energy needs by eating grass alone.

I was invited up to the office control centre where several giant screens filled one wall, some split into 36 CCTV images monitoring every corner of the unit. With no smell and no noise, the view felt more Truman show than real farming, but biosecurity rules prevented Yan from taking me around on the ground in person, he explained, so we zoomed in remotely instead.

In the centre image, a steady stream of cattle were filing on to a continuously rotating milking machine, slotting themselves into each of its bays without human intervention. A handful of workers in a pit below then checked their udders and briskly attached automatic suction teats. The computer-controlled milking machines record output per cow and release the suction when they detect that an udder is empty, at which point the cows back themselves out of the still-revolving platform and follow the bovine traffic back to their hanger-like barns. From a multi-storey watchtower outside we then surveyed the area around. Each Shengmu barn adjoins an open-air pen, and the cows were queuing up in the dry, cold air to relieve their itches on a whirring electric scrubbing brush.

Manure from the farm is collected, and then used to build soil in the desert, fertilising the surrounding new fields where fodder is grown in summer, instead of becoming the polluting slurry that is a serious problem in many CAFOs. The feed is supplemented by commodity imports from the US. When Shengmu’s founders first considered siting their project in the area, experts told them it could not be done, Yan said. “They thought it was too barren.” But now they thought they had kept the herd largely free of the disease that often affects such intensive production while changing the climate, and offering Chinese consumers premium milk they could trust.

Shengmu’s milk is processed in its own factory, where lines of gleaming imported stainless steel pipes and vats turn it into Tetra Paks of premium yoghurt and UHT milk. Its worker dormitory, amid bright green lawns, was quiet when I visited, as the factory was working at a fraction of its capacity. “We overestimated current demand for organic milk and have adjusted production,” Yan said.

In fact, Yili tried to take over the company in 2016, but failed to gain approval from the state. Then at the beginning of 2019, Mengniu made its bid for the Shengmu milk operation. Despite profit warnings, the factory serves another function. It advertises itself as a tourist centre – like several other large-scale farm businesses, it is not just a producer but also a marketing tool, and the Chinese public are encouraged to visit and see how reliably hi-tech and hygienic its dairy processes are.

Years of famine and constant food shortages are a living memory for older Chinese people, and are the spectre that still drives much of party policy today. Under Mao’s Great Leap Forward programme, which began in 1958, farmers had been forced on to collective farms and rural workers diverted away from fields into new industries and the building of infrastructure. The collectives were paid a fixed price for what they produced, but were not allowed to make a profit from any surplus. When mismanagement coincided with flood and severe drought in 1959, agricultural production collapsed. In the Great Famine that followed, at least 36 million people died. Then Mao’s subsequent decade of Cultural Revolution between 1966 and 1976 saw the relocation of millions of people. By the end of it, people in rural areas barely had enough to eat.

Maintaining the growth in prosperity from 40 years of market reform is of existential importance to the leadership, said Charles Parton, adviser on China to the House of Commons foreign affairs select committee and associate fellow of the Royal United Services Institute thinktank. “The legitimacy of the party is based on several pillars, but the first is economic. It’s the promise that the party will make you better off than you were before,” Parton told me. Meat used to be an occasional luxury; dairy was mostly not available, so if you can now afford both meat and milk regularly, you feel wealthier.

Food shortages and food prices that rise faster than wages are historic causes of civil unrest. “The CCP is obsessed with feeding this enormous population – it will go on growing until at least 2030. The reason it bangs on about food security and food safety is that it’s a potential source of instability. People come out on the streets about it. It really hits them if the milk they want to feed their babies is not safe.”

Preparing for the growth in its own demand, China has been buying up land and water resources along with dairies and processing factories across the world. The Belt and Road Initiative, Xi’s plan to build road, rail, cable, pipe and port infrastructure on an unprecedented scale to link China to resources and markets across the world, is at least in part about food security. Launched in 2013, it is expected to cost more than $1tn, and to cross more than 60 countries. It will enable China to access food resources more widely and, thanks to new digital networks, faster than ever before. The Yili group has already acquired huge dairy processing capacity in New Zealand and talks enthusiastically of being part of a Belt and Road dairy alliance, a new China-led milk road across the continents.

Video screens inside the the China Shengmu Organic Dairy in Inner Mongolia. Photograph: Jeff Zhou/CIWF
As the economy has slowed down, it is critical for the state to keep delivering on the promise that people will be better off than before. As Parton explained: “The message is that only the party can make China great again, putting it back in its rightful place at the centre of the world; only China has the right form of governance to deal with huge global challenges.” The party promotes “socialism with Chinese characteristics” on the basis that we face systemic crises such as climate breakdown that can only be fixed with the sort of long-term structural reform that is impossible within short electoral cycles or in unfettered markets where the profit motive trumps all else.

State ownership of the means of production and distribution has shrunk considerably; it now accounts for about 25-30% of business overall, and the party recognises that the private sector is the most dynamic. “But as good Leninists, you don’t let go of the main economic levers,” Parton said. The Chinese dairy sector is an example of the approach: leading companies such as Yili and Mengniu, and new ones such as Shengmu, are well capitalised with private shareholders and foreign investors, but the state retains control in various ways, by being a significant shareholder, giving preferential access to state-bank loans or state assets such as land or to listings on stock exchanges, and through internal party committees.

That has created tension with the west, which questions how open to the free market China really is. The leading Dutch cooperative bank, Rabobank, provides financial services to 17 of the top 20 global dairy companies, so its senior dairy analyst, Peter Paul Coppes, has an inside view of the sector. He has tracked the Chinese dairy market since the 1990s.

“It’s a very big and growing market, and the increase in dairy consumption is driven by the Chinese state. It is making sure that the essential parts of people’s expenditure, whether it’s food or fuel, are affordable,” Coppes said. “We did it in Europe. Now they want to take care of their food security, too.” He is sanguine about what this means for foreign investors. “There is a long-term interest for the Chinese state in foreign collaboration. They just won’t let you get control of production. You’ll have to settle for a minority shareholding.”

The Chinese diet has been transformed with extraordinary speed. The percentage of the population that was undernourished fell from 24% in 1990 to 9% in 2015, as per capita income soared by more than 2,000%, according to the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO). Now, however, like other emerging and developed economies that have adopted western eating habits, the country faces a new dilemma. Inadequate diets are still causing stunting in the poorest country areas, but now about a third of the adult population is overweight, while 6% is obese. China is having to deal with undernutrition and overnutrition at the same time.

“The sort of growth we’ve seen in just 40 years, and for a population of 1.4 billion, it’s never been seen in history. It’s tremendous,” said Shenggen Fan, director general of the Washington-based International Food Policy Research Institute. “The Chinese think that part of the reason why they are shorter than other nationalities is a lack of access to milk. If you drink a cup of milk a day, or have an egg a day, you will get taller. There is good evidence that animal-source foods reduce stunting.”

For Fan, the transformation has been personal. His parents and grandparents were farmers. “I was born in a poor village in Jiangsu province and we were hungry all the time. We really struggled. We lacked basic things – electricity, roads. When I grew up I never, ever had dairy products. I only saw fresh milk when I went to college.”

His grandmother saved the family from the Great Famine, he said, and he was born right after it in 1962. During the collectivisation period you were not to supposed to cook for yourself, but eat in the communal canteens. “My grandmother was smart – she saw it would not work, so she saved food for the whole family hidden around for a rainy day.” His father, a village leader when Deng’s reforms were introduced, was able to increase his income with livestock and cash crops. “We saw the market beginning to work.” That enabled him and his brothers to be educated and, when state restrictions on where you could live were relaxed, they were free to move to the cities and earn more, climbing the socio-economic ladder.

After 33 years in the west, Fan is soon to return to a university post in Beijing, to promote sustainable development. “The government has a very ambitious programme, Healthy China 2030, to make sure children have access to healthy food including dairy produce in all provinces. They are scaling up in China. I’m not against it, but industrialisation must be sustainable. China needs to make sure smallholders don’t lose out in the process. ”

Concerns around finite resources, the climate and the overuse of antibiotics, drugs and pesticides have now moved up the state’s agenda. Last October, in the grandiose, state-run Beijing Conference Center, the Chinese ministry of agriculture laid out what the CCP’s current priorities for farming are. Its chief director of animal husbandry, Ma Youxiang, addressed the second world conference on animal welfare, hosted by the International Cooperation Committee of Animal Welfare (a Chinese NGO) and the FAO, and co-organised with UK-based NGO Compassion in World Farming. Taking to the stage to the triumphal Star Wars theme, Ma described new challenges ahead. An ageing population with greater life expectancy, and the recent relaxation of the one-child policy to allow all couples to have a second child, would increase China’s nutritional requirements. In the tit-for-tat trade war with the US, retaliatory tariffs imposed by China on US soya had dramatically affected the price of animal feed, creating inflationary pressures in food.

“We shall promote the milk industry continuously,” he said. But going all out for growth whatever the environmental costs was no longer possible.

“The priority for livestock used to be just producing more. That’s not an approach we can take any longer. We have over 80m farm units, and many scattered family households. How do we make them more modern?”

While I was in Inner Mongolia, we were taken to tour one of the earliest hydroelectricity dams on the Yellow River, built in 1961 to control what had been frequent flooding, and to channel irrigation. In these upper reaches, the river’s water had powered heavy industry and made the desert bloom. The officials said there was plenty of water, but over-extraction has left other regions critically short. A decade ago, the Yellow River was failing to reach the sea for significant parts of the year. Since then, a digital monitoring and rationing plan has helped reduce contamination and keep it flowing once more but some experts question the sustainability of siting water-intensive industries such as livestock farming in areas of water scarcity and warn that China is heading for an acute water crisis.

A carton of German milk imported to China. Photograph: Sean Gallagher/The Guardian
“Eight of China’s northern provinces suffer from acute water scarcity, four from scarcity, and a further two, Xinjiang and Inner Mongolia, are largely desert. Ground water is falling fast. These provinces account for 38% of China’s agriculture, 46% of its industry, 50% of its power generation, and 41% of its population, so China is going to have to make some very difficult decisions about who and what gets the water,” said Parton. It will also continue to outsource its needs abroad.

Despite Xi’s Made in China 2025 campaign to increase domestic production for many commodities, milk is not included in that homegrown policy. “In the plans from the party, dairy is always very high on the agenda, but they don’t say it has to come from China,” said Coppes from Rabobank. If China’s demand for dairy triples again by 2050, as projected by state targets and some financial analysts, the typical Chinese person would still consume less than half of what the average European gets through. Given the size of its population, that nevertheless poses an increasingly urgent question: how many cows, and other livestock, can the world actually sustain?

(Source: The Guardian)