Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE Corn Thread (merged)

What's on your mind?
General interest discussions, not necessarily related to depletion.

Postby Gogo » Sat 23 Jul 2005, 18:45:01

In the normal course of things I would agree that agricultural subsidies should be stopped. My concern is that if a subsidy is stopped then it becomes uneconomic to continue production and the land will probably be taken out of production, or worse, converted to industrial use. In the period leading up to PO perhaps it is better to keep the land in production so it will not become overgrown or destroyed over the next few years, which would then require more labour and suddenly very precious energy to put back into production just at the time that we will really need the output.
User avatar
Gogo
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon 04 Jul 2005, 03:00:00

Postby Zentric » Sun 24 Jul 2005, 00:00:13

For what it's worth, MTBE, the gasoline-oxygenating additive, has the knack of escaping storage tanks and toxifying the water table, lakes, streams, etc.

Ethanol is a safe, workable replacement for MTBE. Under this scenario, a corn/ethanol subsidy might make sense. The MTBE screwup is fixed without the chemical companies admitting liability. Agribusiness makes more money. And innocents with wells in their back yard stay sick. Perfect.
User avatar
Zentric
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 709
Joined: Mon 14 Mar 2005, 04:00:00

Postby pea-jay » Sun 24 Jul 2005, 03:25:31

This was a good article. I am particularly annoyed with the prevalence of High Fructose Corn Syrup. You just cannot escape that ingredient these days.

US agribusiness was particularly evil in getting that industrial crap corn to flood Mexican corn production. Its quite remakable that a nation that was the ancestral home of corn now is a net importer. This is doubly crappy for most people in both countries too. Poor subsistence farmers in Mexico were driven out of business and off their lands by our imports. Where did they flood? The US.

Gee thanks ADM. Thank you Monsanto. Next time you guys are looking for a new place to push your "corn", might I suggest sticking it up your...

Nevermind
UNplanning the future...
http://unplanning.blogspot.com
User avatar
pea-jay
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1547
Joined: Sat 17 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
Location: NorCal

Postby Schneider » Sun 24 Jul 2005, 11:24:46

Gogo..please,could you watch your "Private Messages" box :oops: !?

I'm from Montreal too :) ...
User avatar
Schneider
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 503
Joined: Sat 23 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Canada/Quebec Province

Postby aahala » Sun 24 Jul 2005, 12:38:12

The price support system in the US for argricultural products worked fairly
well for several decades, balancing out years of surplus and shortage.

Then came the inflationary pressures and the Nixon administration, fearing
a consumer revolt over increasing food prices, changed the system, to
encourage farmers to plant fence row to fence row. Over time the revised
system lead to government surpluses and something had to be done to
get rid of these surpluses -- ethanol and the growing use of crops as oils in
snack food and sweetners in soft drinks.
User avatar
aahala
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 944
Joined: Thu 03 Feb 2005, 04:00:00

Postby EnergySpin » Mon 25 Jul 2005, 12:50:14

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'C')orn can't be taken out of food production for fuel or the masses will get angry and riot, like in Yemen.

Hm the guy in the Oversize me movie also said that.
But this will also be an excellent way to effect a decline of the population in the polluting, resource guzzling Western World
"Nuclear power has long been to the Left what embryonic-stem-cell research is to the Right--irredeemably wrong and a signifier of moral weakness."Esquire Magazine,12/05
The genetic code is commaless and so are my posts.
User avatar
EnergySpin
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2248
Joined: Sat 25 Jun 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Kelpie Wilson: The Tragic Abuse of Corn

Postby pip » Mon 25 Jul 2005, 14:21:52

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('BabyPeanut', 'I') always thought that corn stoves were some weird niche-market device for farmers. Have they gone mainstream?


I think your thread was hijacked. I don't know how mainstream they are, but I will be putting a corn stove in next month. I'm buying an Amaizablaze fireplace insert. Looks like it will cost about $2000 installed and pay for itself in 2 years at last winter's propane prices (which I don't expect to be better this year, or ever). The added bonus is that I can take a few acres and heat my own house if I ever needed to. Nice insurance against an unknown future.
The road goes on forever and the party never ends - REK
User avatar
pip
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 480
Joined: Wed 21 Apr 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Republic of Texas

U.S. Farmers May Plant Less Corn, Soybeans

Postby BabyPeanut » Tue 13 Sep 2005, 17:43:44

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')url=http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=a.noz_4pKMrY&refer=news_index]U.S. Farmers May Plant Less Corn, Soybeans as Energy Costs Soar (link)[/url]

Aug. 30 (Bloomberg) -- Byron Jones, a farmer near Saybrook, Illinois, said he probably will plant less corn next year because the expense of buying fertilizer for crops and fuel for tractors has risen along with energy prices.

``We're all caught on the same treadmill of increasing costs,'' said Jones, who has grown corn and soybeans on his farm about 150 miles (241 kilometers) south of Chicago since 1961.

The price of anhydrous ammonia, a nitrogen-based fertilizer made with natural gas, has climbed 20 percent from last year and 80 percent from two years ago. Natural gas has almost doubled in the past year and is near a record. Diesel fuel, used to run farm equipment, has climbed 71 percent in the past two years as crude oil has exceeded $70 a barrel in New York trading.

More at web site
BabyPeanut
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3275
Joined: Tue 17 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Location: 39° 39' N 77° 77' W or thereabouts

Re: U.S. Farmers May Plant Less Corn, Soybeans

Postby shakespear1 » Tue 13 Sep 2005, 17:58:52

The farmers in Poland are being hurt so the effect is global. Someone is going to make money on this by storing and selling later.

Grain prices here are very low. 8)
Men argue, nature acts !
Voltaire

"...In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation."

Alan Greenspan
shakespear1
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1532
Joined: Fri 13 May 2005, 03:00:00

Re: U.S. Farmers May Plant Less Corn, Soybeans

Postby Starvid » Tue 13 Sep 2005, 19:15:46

Once upon a time the hydrogen needed for ammonia (fertilizer) was made not through steam reforming of natural gas, but by electrolysis of water.

This was abandoned because natural gas became cheaper, and today almost all ammonia plants use natural gas.

I wonder at what natgas price the electrolysis process becomes profitable again?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haber_process
Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
User avatar
Starvid
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3021
Joined: Sun 20 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
Location: Uppsala, Sweden

Re: U.S. Farmers May Plant Less Corn, Soybeans

Postby BabyPeanut » Tue 13 Sep 2005, 21:12:40

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')url=http://www.noble.org/Ag/Soils/NitrogenPrices/Index.htm] Why Are Nitrogen Prices So High? (link)[/url]

by Eddie Funderburg

Nitrogen fertilizer prices have been high for several months now. In some cases, the price has gone up 50 percent or more, but why is it increasing? The price of nitrogen fertilizers is directly related to the price of natural gas (methane). Manufacturing 1 ton of anhydrous ammonia fertilizer requires 33,500 cubic feet of natural gas. This cost represents most of the costs associated with manufacturing anhydrous ammonia. When natural gas prices are $2.50 per thousand cubic feet, the natural gas used to manufacture 1 ton of anhydrous ammonia fertilizer costs $83.75. If the price rises to $7.00 per thousand cubic feet of natural gas, the cost of natural gas used in manufacturing that ton of anhydrous ammonia rises to $234.50, an increase to the manufacturer of $150.75.

$234.50/ton? How out-of-date. Try $500/ton.
BabyPeanut
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3275
Joined: Tue 17 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Location: 39° 39' N 77° 77' W or thereabouts

Re: U.S. Farmers May Plant Less Corn, Soybeans

Postby frankthetank » Tue 13 Sep 2005, 21:31:02

Yup..nat gas right around 11bucks. I've noticed farmer talks about this very subject over @ agriculture.com ... seems some have started thinking about no till farming practices and letting crops sit in the field to dry (vs propane/gas/whatever they use) to dry the crops. This along with the port @ NewO being a little under the weather might make farmers let the crop sit on the ground this fall.

The pieces are all on the table...Have you noticed grain prices really haven't done much for all this negativity...?
User avatar
frankthetank
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6202
Joined: Thu 16 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Southwest WI

Re: U.S. Farmers May Plant Less Corn, Soybeans

Postby Ancien_Opus » Tue 13 Sep 2005, 22:06:57

In many of the Great Plains States natural gas is also used to pump the water to irrigate the fields for corn and soybeans. Farmers are considering the switch to less intensive farming practices due to the high cost of fertilizer and fuel for irrigation.

If you happen to fly over the Platte River on the way through to Denver you'll see strings of green circular fields visible from the air through out Nebraska.

Regards,
User avatar
Ancien_Opus
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 142
Joined: Thu 21 Jul 2005, 03:00:00

Re: U.S. Farmers May Plant Less Corn, Soybeans

Postby aahala » Tue 13 Sep 2005, 22:19:45

I can understand higher input costs can reduce profit, but I don't
understand why the appropriate approach would be to reduce production.

If you are still making a profit at the higher input costs, less production
means even less money to help pay fixed costs. If the higher costs means
a loss, wouldn't you lose even less by not producing at all?
User avatar
aahala
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 944
Joined: Thu 03 Feb 2005, 04:00:00

Re: U.S. Farmers May Plant Less Corn, Soybeans

Postby Gary » Tue 13 Sep 2005, 22:29:39

So do we need to see our urban yards and some parks as "edible landscapes"? Simmons and others make the point that we need to relocalise farming to save liquid fuels. What most of us in the lower 48 USA states grew fruit and nut trees (no, I'm really not joking) and also planted and cultivated lots of veggies in our cities.

Add in serious composting and we might have something worthwhile.

There are groups who've done a variety of successful urban food-growing, especially in poor areas. From community gardens to rooftop container gardens, we ought to be pulling out all the stops on learning to grow food wherever we are.

We don't hear anything from political leaders. It's a do-it-yourself deal, eh? Maybe the feds will have FEMA hire Halliburton to teach gardening to starving citizens after things get really bad. Another lucrative, no-bid contract. (Sorry, couldn't resist the sarcastic remark today. I'll try to behave now.)

Here in Minneapolis, MN, we just had Mayoral and City council primaries today. Set amoungst an enourmous amount of farmland, our local media rarely mention rising natural gas prices and their implications for agriculture. General Mills and other big agribusiness/food companies are worried about getting sugar which used to come up the Mississippi from NO, but even concern is kept muted. Stock up on a 7-year supply of Frosted Flakes, folks!
pedaling for peace and ecojustice -- Gary
User avatar
Gary
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 132
Joined: Fri 07 Jan 2005, 04:00:00
Location: Mpls, MN, USA

Re: U.S. Farmers May Plant Less Corn, Soybeans

Postby CarlinsDarlin » Tue 13 Sep 2005, 23:58:27

Gary,
Excellent ideas. I think I'll print out your post and pass it around the community. With Katrina fresh on their minds, perhaps it'll spur a few people to act.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'G')eneral Mills and other big agribusiness/food companies are worried about getting sugar which used to come up the Mississippi from NO, but even concern is kept muted. Stock up on a 7-year supply of Frosted Flakes, folks!


On a related note, you might want to get extra coffee with those corn flakes. Mom went to Wally World yesterday to get some groceries. The store was nearly sold out of several popular brands - Folgers was sold out. She said the coffee "shelves were pretty empty." The manager directly blamed it on the damage from Katrina to the Port of New Orleans.

On the news yesterday, they said the port should be back up and running "within 5 months" - that's a long time to have to re-route coffee, or do without. I expect prices to rise as well.

Glad I got a couple cans stocked up. Wish I had more.
Kathy
User avatar
CarlinsDarlin
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1363
Joined: Fri 02 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
Top

Re: U.S. Farmers May Plant Less Corn, Soybeans

Postby Chaparral » Wed 14 Sep 2005, 03:47:50

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ancien_Opus', 'I')n many of the Great Plains States natural gas is also used to pump the water to irrigate the fields for corn and soybeans. Farmers are considering the switch to less intensive farming practices due to the high cost of fertilizer and fuel for irrigation.

If you happen to fly over the Platte River on the way through to Denver you'll see strings of green circular fields visible from the air through out Nebraska.

Regards,


I've noticed quite a few of those circular plots have turned brown over the last 20 years as the water table has dropped. I'd guess peak oil and the nat gas cliff will be pretty bad for the high plains economies. Hello Buffalo Commons!!
User avatar
Chaparral
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 767
Joined: Sun 14 Aug 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Dead civilization walking
Top

Re: U.S. Farmers May Plant Less Corn, Soybeans

Postby EnergySpin » Wed 14 Sep 2005, 06:40:35

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Starvid', 'O')nce upon a time the hydrogen needed for ammonia (fertilizer) was made not through steam reforming of natural gas, but by electrolysis of water.

This was abandoned because natural gas became cheaper, and today almost all ammonia plants use natural gas.

I wonder at what natgas price the electrolysis process becomes profitable again?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haber_process

Apparently your Norwegian neighboors were doing till the 80s.
The German Environmental Ministry Handbook still contains a section on the environmental impact of ammonia plants generating NH3 from electricity so there must have been plants doing this till very recently (I started the ammonia thread as a hydrogen carrier and posted a little bit about the future of fertilizers cause I was sick by the repetitive doom-call: no oil, no gas no fertilizers).
My gut feeling is that is probably cost effective now or will be in short period of time to generate ammonia using electricity. And there was one recent publication in [i]Science]/i] where the reaction proceeded in room temperature using a Ru catalyst.

Historical note
----------------
If you read the talk that Haber himself gave when he was presented with the Nobel prize in 1919, you will find that he did not do a natural gas feedstock for heat/hydrogen. He was using coke to generate Hydrogen from water which was combined with nitrogen to yield NH3. He received the Nobel prize for the last step of the Haber process (it is called the Haber reaction) because he figured out the right combo of catalysts, pressure, temperature etc.
"Nuclear power has long been to the Left what embryonic-stem-cell research is to the Right--irredeemably wrong and a signifier of moral weakness."Esquire Magazine,12/05
The genetic code is commaless and so are my posts.
User avatar
EnergySpin
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2248
Joined: Sat 25 Jun 2005, 03:00:00
Top

PreviousNext

Return to Open Topic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron