The UK’s food security is threatened by a combination of challenges. Erratic weather and extreme events disrupt agricultural productivity. Rising input costs, post-Brexit complexities, and the war in Ukraine have driven up fertiliser prices. Additionally, farmers face increasing fuel costs, making it harder to stay profitable.
According to the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU), UK farmers spent £1.42 billion on fertilisers in 2022 and £964 million in 2023, compared to £470 million in 2020 before the gas price crisis. In 2022, agriculture accounted for about 12% of the UK’s total GHG emissions, with methane from livestock and manure contributing 58% and nitrous oxide from nitrogen-based fertilisers contributing 26% (2022 UK Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Final Figures). The energy-intensive Haber-Bosch process for producing nitrogen-based fertilisers is responsible for approximately 1-2% of global CO2 emissions due to its dependence on fossil fuels (The Royal Society, 2020).
Researchers from the University of Cambridge suggest that with scalable technological and policy interventions, emissions could be reduced by up to 80% by 2050, primarily by improving fertiliser use efficiency and transitioning to less emissions-intensive types. Companies like Yara are pioneering renewable energy-powered fertiliser production, achieving a 70-90% reduction in carbon emissions compared to traditional methods. Capturing and utilising carbon dioxide for fertiliser production, as explored by CCM Technologies, presents another exciting avenue. These advancements offer environmental benefits, but can UK farmers afford to embrace them?
Challenges and Considerations for UK Farmers: Cost, Effectiveness, and Beyond
Low-carbon and carbon-negative fertilisers offer a potential pathway to reconcile the competing demands – balancing economic survival with environmental responsibility. While the long-term cost-benefit analysis might be positive, with the potential for improved soil health, increased crop yields, and reduced reliance on volatile fossil fuel prices, the initial investment can be a significant hurdle.
For example, urea, a common nitrogen fertiliser, emits significant nitrous oxide. Biochar, made from biomass, sequesters carbon and can offset emissions. Their costs and benefits vary by production, application, and regional conditions. Government incentives, such as subsidies or tax reductions, could encourage adoption. Additionally, research into cost-effective production methods is necessary. Fertiliser efficacy varies across different agricultural systems, requiring tailored solutions.
Currently, there are no specific subsidies or tax breaks for low-carbon fertilisers in the UK. However, the government is focusing on sustainability and the ELM scheme could indirectly incentivise their use. Research funding and climate change levies might also impact the market for low-carbon options.
Another critical factor is fertiliser effectiveness on diverse UK agricultural systems. Farmers need tailored solutions suitable for their specific crops and soil conditions. Collaboration between researchers, industry leaders, and farmers is crucial to develop and refine these solutions, ensuring these fertilisers deliver optimal results across the UK’s agricultural landscape.
Beyond the financial constraints, practical considerations also exist. Farmers need training and support to understand the application and benefits of low-carbon and carbon-negative fertilisers. Additionally, ensuring a readily available supply of these fertilisers across the UK is vital. Distribution networks need to be established to ensure easy access for all farmers, regardless of location.
Optimising Fertiliser Use for Sustainable Agriculture
The UK imports 60% of its fertilisers (AHDB), risking price fluctuations, supply disruptions, and geopolitical issues. This also leads to a high carbon footprint from production and transport. The closure of CF Industries’ UK plants (NFUOnline) increased reliance on imports, impacting fertiliser availability, cost, and domestic production capacity. Yara’s new plant, set for 2025 (Yara International), will help, but complete fertilisers need more nutrients.
Polyhalite, a multi-nutrient mineral that complements traditional synthetic fertlisers offering potential pathways to low-carbon and carbon-negative fertilisers. Here is why –
- Its production process is inherently less energy-intensive compared to traditional mineral fertilisers.
- By providing multiple essential nutrients in a single product, it can reduce the overall transportation and application of fertilisers, lowering associated carbon emissions.
- Its potential to replace some synthetic fertilsers can contribute to reducing the overall carbon footprint of the UK’s agricultural sector.
However, the extraction and processing of polyhalite are complex and capital-intensive, as evidenced by the delays and cost overruns of Anglo American’s Woodsmith project. Despite these obstacles, Anglo American’s Woodsmith project, if realised, could significantly enhance the UK’s fertiliser security, reduce reliance on imports, and support the transition to a low-carbon agricultural system.
Combining Polyhalite with other sustainable practices like crop rotation and precision agriculture, the UK can move closer to a more resilient, efficient, and environmentally friendly agricultural system. Balancing economic viability and environmental sustainability in fertiliser use is crucial for the UK’s agricultural sector.
A combination of low-carbon and carbon-negative fertilisers, government support, and technological advancements can contribute to a resilient and sustainable food production system in the UK.