Saturday, December 1. 2007

Good Luck

Good luck finding people to grow camelina for this project with grain prices as high as they are. I'm not sure how high wheat prices are but I heard barley is over $200 a ton and durham is over $20 a bushel, if you can find any. With these kinds of prices I'm not sure people are going to be willing to try an unproven, alternative crop out.

Also like I say, every acre of land we plant to a bio-fuel crop is one less acre that is there to feed people. Fuel for your vehicle or fuel for your body, which is more important to you? Which is more important for those poor in the world? By developing bio-fuels are we as a society causing poor people in the world to go hungry? Should we be concerned? Tough questions. Ethically which is more important. I know what concerns me, the question becomes what our society decides is more important. Feeding people or feeding vehicles. I fear our societies decision.

I don't think a tough question is disrespectful. Helen Thomas

Posted by

Sarpy Sam

in Agriculture, Food Security at 06:22 | Comments (7) | Trackbacks (0)

Defined tags for this entry: biodiesel, camelina, feeding people, food security

Related entries by tags:
Times are Changing
Crazy
Camelina
Bio-Fuels Aren't A Green Fuel
Palm Oil

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

First of all, I greatly enjoy your blog and the glimpses into what life is like on a working ranch. I've never lived on a farm, but I've been around agriculture all my life (living in Iowa), but I have a deep respect for farmers and ranchers who, much like teachers, are inadequately compensated for the value of their life's labor.

About the biofuel vs. food debate, I'm not sure the answer is quite as black and white as choosing one or the other (my apologies if you didn't mean to imply that it was a strict either/or question).

If we don't find alternative fuel sources, in addition to reducing consumption, the world's hungry and poor are doomed anyway. What's needed is to find a balance between the competing imperatives of food and fuel supply, and I share your concern that no one seems to be interested in even asking these tough questions, let alone answer them.

#1 Julia (Homepage) on 2007-12-01 11:20 (Reply)

If you feel I am saying we need to choose one over the other, I'm sorry I don't make my point better. I get real upset at these people who think that bio-fuels, ethanol and biodiesel, are the salvation of our energy problems. By turning our food into fuel we are endangering not only our own food security, but the food security of people throughout the world.

There are lots of ideas out there for alternative fuels that don't take food out of our mouths that I would like to see developed. The other thing is reducing consumption like you say. By trying to keep fuel prices down, we are promoting consumption of fuel. Voluntarily reducing consumption would go a long ways towards solving the problems. My last vehicle I purchased was not an ideal vehicle for me and my family. It is too small among other things but I was looking at the fuel economy. I had to do my part to reduce my fuel usage.

Reducing consumption. That's the kind of thinking we need, not turning our food into fuel. That's a risky strategy.

#1.1 Sarpy Sam (Homepage) on 2007-12-01 19:59 (Reply)

Thanks for your thoughtful reply. I think we are on the same page; I agree that biofuels can never be the entire answer to our energy problems. Do you think they have any role at all? Where I live, the University of Iowa uses oat hulls (which would otherwise be throw away) from the local Quaker Oats plant to partially fuel its power plant, which saves them hundreds of thousands of dollars each year and I don't know how much fossil fuel consumption. Converting waste products to fuel seems a more promising biofuel initiative than converting food acres to fuel acres, and I wish it would get more attention.

Here in Iowa, there is so much focus on ethanol as a way to "rescue" corn prices for farmers that people are losing sight of the fact that when you factor in the conversion process, it really doesn't result in significant fossil-fuel savings. That's in addition to the concern you have so eloquently expressed about the conversion of acreage from producing food to producing fuel.

And the current infatuation with them is undoubtedly distracting people from investigating the viability of other alternative fuels, such as wind power and who knows what else hasn't even been thought of yet.

And you're absolutely right about the artificially low fuel prices impeding any serious conservation efforts. As much as it hurts my wallet to say it, the higher fuel prices over the past few years seem to finally be forcing people to consider changing their lifestyles just a little bit, and that's a tiny step in the right direction.

Thanks again for the thoughtful discussion. I'm sorry this is so long; it's a treat for me to be able to talk out these issues.

#1.1.1 Julia (Homepage) on 2007-12-01 20:39 (Reply)

IMHO biofuels are not the answer because of the competition with farmland which is getting scarce as it is. See my post on vertical farming:
http://onaridge.blogspot.com/2007/11/vetical-farming-wave-of-future.html

BTW I love Helen Thomas. What a lady!

#2 windyridge (Homepage) on 2007-12-02 11:54 (Reply)

Has anyone looked into the cost of equipment for raising camelina?

#3 moos (Homepage) on 2007-12-02 16:06 (Reply)

To tell you the truth, I don't know what equipment it takes. I am under the impression that the same equipment you use for small grains works for camelina but I'm not sure.

#3.1 Sarpy Sam (Homepage) on 2007-12-02 19:57 (Reply)

Camelina can be farmed with the same equipment as small grains. But there isn't any herbicide labeled for the crop yet. And camelina isn't a very competative crop so if a field has any weeds it turns into a big weed wreck. Several of my neighbors tried it last year and regretted it. I won't try it just trying to get better wheat.

#4 ed on 2007-12-03 22:25 (Reply)

Add Comment

Random Photo from The Gallery

I think this is the most snow we have gotten all winter. It sure looks pretty with the sunshine, even though the mud as it melts is a pain. Taken 2/14/2007.

From album: Landscapes