The ‘’food for man’’situation was discussed in detail in this post reemphasizes the key role that energy subsidies play in the production of food and fiber (cotton, wool, paper, wood, and so on). The age old paddy rice culture is very efficient in terms of food yield per unit of energy subsidy, but it is backbreaking for the people who plant and harvest the rice. At the other extreme, feedlot beef requires 10 cal of fuel energy for every calorie of food produced, but neither man nor beast has to do much work. Feedlots do not make very good ecological sense for another reason. Cows have a marvelous adaptation the rumen, which enables them to convert very low protein food such as grass and hay into high protein food. When cows are fed rich grains in a feedlot, this adaptation is bypassed, and the meat produced tends to be too fatty for good human health. Also, feedlots produce server watershed pollution that adds another stress on the environment, and another cost for man. There is much to be said for putting the cow back on grass.

        Avoidance of the boom and bust syndrome, as discussed on this post is another reason for considering a somewhat Les energy intensive agriculture especially for undeveloped countries. It is difficult and costly in terms of energy to sustain very high yields of the same crop over long periods of time.