Name:Course:Instructor:Date: High demand of coffee in any company is marked as the core reason why outsourcing is opted for. The same case applies to Australian Clean Green Coffee Production Company

Oil We Eat Analysis

Student’s Name

Instructor

Course

Date

Manning urges that industrial agriculture is both “uneconomical and damaging” hence an urgent need of a solution. He highlight significant concerns both in the traditional and modern-day farming. He suggests that there is sufficient evidence in waste and destruction with the subjects relevance however there is inconsistence in his cognitive on solutions. He begins by appraising the energy path from the sun through plants to animals and finally to people. Humans’ consumption of plant energy is produced annually is 40%. Manning recaps that “energy can be concentrated hence conflict convoys the concentration.” Framing concentrates energy in grains therefore assuming an onset with social inequality implying maintained violence. Grain’s strenuous energy is made possible by fierce calamity that disperses the competition ground. The violence is produced in farming annually.

Agriculture excerpts the energy stored in the soil converting it to grains. The energy is often lost in form of fat or before it gets us through attrition, damage of natural plants among others. The process of extracting energy form the soil forced farmers to move to new, unexploited lands trouncing the original occupants. Manning quotes the consistency of famine in primitive Europe when Europeans could not migrate to new lands. He suggests that famine rose because the soil’s energy had been exhausted, emphasizing on the idea of agriculture’s negativity.

Manning turns to the modern farming and criticizes its use of fertilizers resulting from oil. Use of these fertilizers implies using fossilized energy faster than its storage, causing a subsequent exhaustion. “Fertilizers cause harm by generating more food than we our requirement” and by running into waterways resulting in algae blooms and die-offs, in the ocean acid rain and global warming. Manning concludes that we are obliged to eating low on the food chain and must eat local unrefined, professionally manufactured food to avoid the entire waste.

Methods in Iowa are not too different from the rest of our agriculture regions. Manning’s choice of “wheat-beef people” to demonstrate the purportedly imperialistic drive of wheat is less representative. Manning says that there is high energy wastage but the other half of his article gives a description of what happened. It implies that not only realizing new store of energy like oil but also fresh ways of exploiting known energy whether in sewage or sunlight.

A bigger problem is the contradiction between his evidence and his conclusions. He gives a contradiction that farming has “constantly been both extravagant and vicious.” Yet he suggests that we go back to customary agriculture (Genauer, pp. 36). He wants us to consume low on the diet chain hence minimized waste than meat consumption. However, where do we obtain the harvests that he needs us to eat except from the farms with inherent problems of wheat-beef people’s farm? We might eat unrefined food but the wheat-beef people were not eating Snickers. The suggested solutions take us back to time before green revolution, however he suggest that going back there is not the solution.

Manning seems to advocate that we should “return to stalking and gathering” by killing elks. The suggestion implicates a bigger problem of the world’s population. There is insufficient elk to chase. The sustainability of hunting and gathering will require a much lower population density. Manning seems to assume either that there are much more elk than their actual amount or that a big populace must vanish for the utilization of this solution. Manning has a remarkable body of evidence supporting his thesis based on certain assumptions but they are not justifiable.

Work cited

Genauer, Ethan. "Peak Oil & Community Food Security." Communities 130 (2006): 36.