Global Food Crisis

[angry cow]

A catastrophic event is occurring with far reaching economic and security implications. It is being seriously under reported as the effect in western nations has been uncomfortable, but for over a billion people rising food costs could cause riots, instability, and mass starvation.


http://ap.google.com/media/ALeqM5ijy98XiiOoLL_8ya_BFt-sDKAHiQ?size=s
LONDON (AP) — Ration cards. Genetically modified crops. The end of pile-it-high, sell-it-cheap supermarkets.

These possible solutions to the first global food crisis since World War II — which the World Food Program says already threatens 20 million of the poorest children — are complex and controversial. And they may not even solve the problem as demand continues to soar.

A "silent tsunami" of hunger is sweeping the world's most desperate nations, said Josette Sheeran, the WFP's executive director, speaking Tuesday at a London summit on the crisis.

The skyrocketing cost of food staples, stoked by rising fuel prices, unpredictable weather and demand from India and China, has already sparked sometimes violent protests across the Caribbean, Africa and Asia.

The price of rice has more than doubled in the last five weeks, she said. The World Bank estimates food prices have risen by 83 percent in three years.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gVMIPi3dMFpmC3mUr_kNyximdCvwD9078FSG0


EDIT: UN just increased number of countries susceptible to widespread unrest from 33 to 36 countries.

[The Dane]

Horrible...!!!

But its always up to the western countries to do something.
Or what?

[Mu-Meson]

Step 1: Cut out the biofuels nonsense.
Step 2: Get real worried about global cooling, and pray that some big sunspots start appearing on the sun, and soon.

[a_very_ex_STAB]

I can foresee WW2 style food rationing being brought in in developed countries at some point in say the next 20 years to ensure a more equitable distribution of food for the whole world's population.

It won't be a pleasant transition for a lot of people in the developed world but IMO it would actually do a lot of people a lot of good!

[Flagg]

The % of the average westerner's income dedicated to purchasing food has been dropping for decades in the west...ask your parents what % of their pay packet they paid for food.

Nearly all internationally traded commodities are denominated in US Dollars.

Official inflation figures are far understating REAL inflation.

This is best exemplified by parabolic energy price increases.....lagged by exploding agricultural commodity prices(once agricultural energy inputs flowed through to skyrocketing producer costs).

In an environment like today, where REAL inflation is far understated wage inflation is slow to follow.

Relatively affluent 1st world westerners(on $100 a day) will complain about increased food prices but see limited change.

2nd world citizens(on $25-50 a day) will adapt their diets with cheaper substitutes.

3rd world citizens(on $5 a day) will riot and suffer, but probably scrounge enough to survive.

4th world citizens(on $1 a day) will simply starve and die unfortunately.

These are the "long tail" effects that can be attributed(although not wholely) to inflation....as well as agricultural subsidies(ethanol), and agricultural industry protectionism.

In the 3rd world, Haiti's government fell due to rioting masses desperate over food price increases.

In the 2nd world, Argentina's Ag industry went riot over Ag export controls government wanted to implement.

In the 1st world, imported bags of rice have purchase quantity limits in some places and restaurants/food stores are putting up placards explaining raw material price increases to complaining customers.....like pizza cheese.


It will get worse before it gets better.......remember it's a big global machine that will take time to change course.

[Blackwater11114]

I can foresee WW2 style food rationing being brought in in developed countries at some point in say the next 20 years to ensure a more equitable distribution of food for the whole world's population.

It won't be a pleasant transition for a lot of people in the developed world but IMO it would actually do a lot of people a lot of good!

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't most of the "developed" nations supply the majority of world food producing and distribution networks?? How can you force them to "ensure a more equitable distribution of food for the whole world's population".?? Your suggestion is as ridiculous as it sounds and it sounds to much like communism/socialism/fascism to me. A more reasonable suggestion, is a social-economic solution in Africa (which can produce 600% more food than they now do) which would make great strides to alleviate problems.

[INAT]

Oh yes this is the part of the plan to decrease the world population by 90% .Codex Alimentarius is the way. Tinfoil hat? http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5266884912495233634&q=&hl=en

[nullterm]

Step 1: Cut out the biofuels nonsense.
Step 2: Get real worried about global cooling, and pray that some big sunspots start appearing on the sun, and soon.

Yeap, dump the stupidity. It's a horribly inefficient way of moving from point A to B. If we're that passionate about alternative ways of powering vehicles, then it's time to ditch internal combustion. Or atleast provide those interested with more alternatives.

I really doubt biofuels are anywhere near as efficient energy or cost wise compared to an electric car. Compare a solar collector charging a battery (simple one step) to the number of steps and time it takes to grow and then convert corn to ethanol. After all, in both cases they ultimately derive the energy from the sun. Just one does it more efficiently.

But electric cars... that's a whole other issue.

[Flagg]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't most of the "developed" nations supply the majority of world food producing and distribution networks?? How can you force them to "ensure a more equitable distribution of food for the whole world's population".?? Your suggestion is as ridiculous as it sounds and it sounds to much like communism/socialism/fascism to me. A more reasonable suggestion, is a social-economic solution in Africa (which can produce 600% more food than they now do) which would make great strides to alleviate problems.

If the developed world produces most of the food(one reason WHY that is: how can a small producer or even a large private producer in Africa compete against the resources of an industrial scale producer supported with significant government tariff/subsidy resources? They can't..so they don't) and the developed world shifts production away from food and towards fuel(enough to where prices rise substantially) an inconvenience to the wealthy can become a mortal threat to the dirt poor.

I know it sounds like I'm a card carrying communist...trust me I'm the farthest thing from it.

But I think this train wreck was clearly foreseeable...when commodity prices exploded combined with short-sighted ag to ethanol policies 3rd/4th world consequences were sure to follow.

Just as we have not yet nearly seen the full impact of the sub-prime/credit/derivative stupidity we are only just scratching the surface of food production/price issues.....odds are it's going to get much worse, before it gets better.

On a related note:


Some nations have dramatically changed their energy policies in recent years, such as:

Russia effectively nationalizing its energy resources

Venezuela nationalizing its energy resources

Bolivia nationalizing its energy resources

Saudi Arabia refusing to increase production

UAE shifting some production allocated for the West to China...because they are willing to pay more

They are all throwing around their energy leverage muscles like a bunch of drunk steroid freaks out on the piss

If I were Machiavelli........I'd almost think the West is creating leverage in the form of food production to be held over heads like the sword of Damocles......much like oil/gas leverage..although I'm not convinced ag production can be as effectively stage-managed as much more concentrated energy resources.

One interesting note...Saudi is quitting it's food independance initiative...too water and energy expensive......Saudi has lots of oil....but you can't eat it ;)

So does that mean if Saudi turns off the tap we go all Mad MAx and if we turn off the flow of wheat they starve like 80's Ethiopians?

It almost smells like the latest variant of Mutually Assured Destruction.

[muttbutt]

They are already talking in the EU of relaxing agricultural qoatas to produce more food, at the level of efficency farmers are at now, we could probably feed 1/2 the planet if they wanted to too just from Europe....:roll:

[a_very_ex_STAB]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't most of the "developed" nations supply the majority of world food producing and distribution networks?? How can you force them to "ensure a more equitable distribution of food for the whole world's population".?? Your suggestion is as ridiculous as it sounds and it sounds to much like communism/socialism/fascism to me. A more reasonable suggestion, is a social-economic solution in Africa (which can produce 600% more food than they now do) which would make great strides to alleviate problems.

Well they may have distribution networks as you put it but what happens if the producing countries decide to feed their own burgeoning populations first and not put anything into the distribution networks? Surely if that happens food rationing would end up being inevitable. I note that India has just announced a ban on export of non-Basmati rice in order to help feed its own population leading to shortage of supply and increased rice prices on global commodities markets so its already happening.

[Flagg]

They are already talking in the EU of relaxing agricultural qoatas to produce more food, at the level of efficency farmers are at now, we could probably feed 1/2 the planet if they wanted to too just from Europe....:roll:


Is that really the case?

I own a farm(dairy specifically) and I was left with the distinct impression that EU Quotas are more effective at protecting inefficient dairy farmers with exclusive control of their domestic market and preventing or limiting other nations from selling into it?

Or am I wrong?

In NZ, in the 80's, farm/ag subsidies were eliminated and it culled the farming industry for a generation...but the long-term end result was an industry that rose from the ashes and can now profitably sell to both the domestic NZ market and the competitive international market.

My GUESS is that the EU will be lobbied by farmers to keep barriers high to prevent their livelihoods from being destroyed.

What it means, again unless I'm mistaken, EU citizens pay more than they should to support EU farmers who are internationally inefficient.

3rd/4th world countries do not have the wealth to subsidize their farmers..so they have mostly very inefficient substinence farmers....everyone else has no choice but to pay wealthy western prices....that's my understanding of things.

[I can't think of a name]

People have been saying it for a long time.

The "Organic Food" nonsense (there is not real standard to define it). Has driven farmers to grow produce "cleanly" thus decreasing their yield per acre. They don't care because they can sell it for higher prices with the organic label.

This makes middle and upper class yuppy Americans feel healthy but it also decreases the supply and ups the cost for poor people around the world to get food.

This is just one of the components of the problem today.

[a_very_ex_STAB]

sounds to much like communism/socialism/fascism to me.

You say that like it's a bad thing:)

What makes you think that 'extreme' measures will not be required when things really kick off in the future? It's going to get a lot worse and a lot of spoiled ppl in developed nations are going to end up feeling the slap of firm government if we are to survive.

[Shadowstorm]

People have been saying it for a long time.

The "Organic Food" nonsense (there is not real standard to define it). Has driven farmers to grow produce "cleanly" thus decreasing their yield per acre. They don't care because they can sell it for higher prices with the organic label.

This makes middle and upper class yuppy Americans feel healthy but it also decreases the supply and ups the cost for poor people around the world to get food.

This is just one of the components of the problem today.
Agree with you there. On biofuels and ethanol, they are just a waste of money, time and does more harm then good to environment.

[Backwoodshunter]

I think there are alot of misconceptions here, biofuels aren't all bad, the way we're implmenting them is, its the same old farming and harvesting and shipping methods that we've used for the past century(the ones that got us here in the first place) are the ones being used. Its the long travel routes for the end result and not enough widespread support, there are certain fuels that can be run off algae, with minimal waste output for the benefit gained, plus there are numerous other plant oils that farmed correctly can produce similar yields.

And no organic farming isn't soley a yuppy feel good market. We are depleting underground aquifers, we're poisoning groundwater and ruining soil. The crucial silt to so many farming areas? Gone due to the common way Dam's are implemented, hundreds of tons of irreplaceable topsoil gone due to the way our farming is currently done. Organically grown foods and certified forests are a very good way of reducing the chemical impact on ecosystems(ones like the nyc watershed which is crucial for providing water to the big apple) and effeciently using topsoil, and preventing the destruction of public and private land, keeping species alive(after all biodiversity is key to keeping nature healthy). Obviously we need to find the right mix, and alot of our good intentions are killing us right now due to our jump the gun nature.

We can't count on "better living through science" as its what got us here, sustainable and organic farming methods are a good start, because at our current population(and the exponential rate at which its increasing) theres no way we can possibly sustain the burgeoning population, and thats just when it comes to providing resources, let alone trying to dispose of waste.

[dava]

Agree with the waste of time and money but


does more harm then good to environment

Care to elaborate on this one?



Official inflation figures are far understating REAL inflation.

Care to explain this one too?
I know CPI in most countries leave out energy prices but keep in mind that this is reflected in all other commodities.
Main reason for leaving them out was that this has protected us from even greater inflation due to automatic indexation of various government handouts.

[Flagg]

Care to explain this one too?
I know CPI in most countries leave out energy prices but keep in mind that this is reflected in all other commodities.
Main reason for leaving them out was that this has protected us from even greater inflation due to automatic indexation of various government handouts.

Have a look at this:

www.nowandfutures.com

M3 growth % - economic growth % = inflation % (rough guide)

[AmandlaEwetu]

Food looks like it could become the new super weapon/resource,after all manufactured goods are dropping in price while basics are going up and you cant eat DVD players,can't wait until water is as valuable as judging by the amount of rain the UK gets we would be the new Saudi Arabiawoot

whoo hoo we could retake the empire rofl

[junglejim]

http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s173/patrick_bretsch/r4070185624.jpg

(Picts from news.yahoo.com)

http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s173/patrick_bretsch/NFAApril32008.jpg

Althought it hasn't gotten as far as people rioting in the streets. This is what's happening in the Philippines. The government is just making sure that the Rice stocks are being delivered to its proper destination, not the hoarding businessmen.

[wilhelm]

Something not really mentioned here is the population explosion that has occurred in many parts of the developing world. In Africa specifically, there seems to be absolutely no forethought put into having a sustainable amount of children. If you can't feed your 2nd or 3rd child, why have a 4th, 5th or 6th? Statistics from Rwanda and Burundi at the height of that horrible genocide illustrate this. Even when the horrible action of about 1 million people were being murdered in less than a year, those countries had some of the highest population increases on the planet!! 18 of the top 20 highest birth rates countries are in Africa. 40 out of the top 50 countries. In Mali, Niger, Uganda and Somalia for example, using the Total Fertility Rate (TFR) method, the average women has about 7 children! In Mali, the average women in 2007 was having an extra child compared to 2000. It is simply unsustainable. As ye sow, so shall ye reap...

Compare the population of 1900 to 2008 and you'll get my drift. I live in Africa and see the effects of mindless fornication every day. Whilst it is not the childs fault, at some stage, some form of accountability needs to take place....

[Calanen]

I just think Angela Merkel needs to start skipping meals.

[kosse]

Oh, the horror. I think I'll go out and grab some juicy steaks from the local market.

Seriously, if some countries can't feed their populations there should not be that many people there in the first place. The way I see it the nature is just taking it's course. It's cruel, but hey, it was bound to happen at some point.

And no, I won't ration what I eat.

[pacifist]

In some countries people are multiplying like bacteria without thinking long term consequences. This kind of population growth cannot continue indefinitely.

[dava]

M3 growth % - economic growth % = inflation %

Sorry but thats just blatanly wrong.
M3 growth can be changed due to a various of reasons without affecting price levels. For example right now with all the confusion about the CDO's, there is a big capital stream from longterm investments to short term investments.
Hence M3 is growing really fast (longterm investments dont get included in that one) while this has nothing to do with rising prices.

Looks like a conspiracy theory to me.



In Mali, Niger, Uganda and Somalia for example, using the Total Fertility Rate (TFR) method, the average women has about 7 children! In Mali, the average women in 2007 was having an extra child compared to 2000. It is simply unsustainable. As ye sow, so shall ye reap...

Sure, but sadly, there is a inverse connection between your economic status and the amount of children. Look at most european countries (and i suspect US too) in the 1900's. Most of the folks who were born around that age come from families with 7+ children.

Its not until we got a big economic boom that our fertility rate has dropped. More wealth means having another child becomes more costly (in terms of lost alternatives). You could do loads of other fun things with the time and money you have to devote on a (nother) child. However if you are poor, you dont have much to lose. Look at the impoverished families in our society, those are the big families. They didnt became poor because of their children, they became big families because they are poor. You can blaim them for having no vision, but after all, its human.

And in africa ofcourse, the pope and his idiotic 'no condom'-policy creates a mess too.

[eechoss]

I agree on the population boom, It has to stop. IF you cant take care of one or two kids to begin with do not have six more. All around my city, (East of Toronto) farm land is being used for building houses. Fields are now cramped with expensive houses. By the time people realize that we need more food/farms it will be to late.There will be a worldwide food crisis. I think the future is going to get very rough, I think Ill go plant a big garden in my yard now....:roll:

[homegrowncat]

wow, there is a lot of stuff here, but what I want to know is if 6 months we'll still be talking about this issue when

A. The Aussies have recovered from their 4 years of drought and produce a wheat and rice crop
B. Ukraine does not freeze out this year and produces a wheat crop
C. The central U.S. does not 1.) freezes out in Kansas and the Dakotas and 2.) have a drought in Oklahoma and Texas thus putting more wheat on the market
D. the dollar starts to make some headway back and U.S. grain exports are not as good looking to foreign buyers
E. South American corn production finally comes along

Now granted I know that most of my points have to factor in the weather which can't be done in any accurate mannor and I am also hoping the dollar rises.

From the viewpoint of a farmkid in the United States we are facing a perfect storm right now. Bad weather over the last 4 years around the world, big drawdowns on grain stocks and developing countries becoming developed and demanding more food is what is causing the runup in food prices.

And also, lay off ethanol, it isn't a demon fuel, it isn't bad, it is what it is. All it does is provide another market for grain farmers. Instead of the 2 (livestock or human food) that we've always had, now we have three.

And for anyone who says that farmers are making money hand over fist right now, i beg to differ. Yes, the cash price for commodities has risen, but so have my input cost.

For corn ground in Iowa, the average input cost will be approx $700. Inputs are rent, seed, fertilizar, fuel and labor. I still have to pay to harvest of the grain, trucking, storgage.

All we've seen is a shift on the curve.

[Ordie]

I was at COSTCO yesterday.

No rice

People are hording.

[Xingbake]

I was at COSTCO yesterday.

No rice

People are hording.Potato is better than rice :)

[Backwoodshunter]

The main thing we need to concetrate on is limiting population growth. Besides that, we all need to look into urban farming, i.e. farming within the city or the available land on the outskirts. Supposedly, I'd have to go back and look it up, but cities like Beijing and London supply a majority(2/3s for Beijing) of their farmed food using urban farming or at least are capable of doing so.

I personally believe it could be a dark time ahead, I'm not sure of how severe our problem is, but its getting bad.

[Xingbake]

The main thing we need to concetrate on is limiting population growth. Besides that, we all need to look into urban farming, i.e. farming within the city or the available land on the outskirts. Supposedly, I'd have to go back and look it up, but cities like Beijing and London supply a majority(2/3s for Beijing) of their farmed food using urban farming or at least are capable of doing so. Believe it or not, if China didn't apply the one-child policy in 1980s, the current food shortage worldwide will be much worse.

[junglejim]

Actually, there is no rice shortage in the Philippines, its just that some sectors are hording and riding on the scare to jack up the prices. i wonder how it will go , since rice from US stocks have arrived and are sold at below market prices.

The Philippines is a unique case where in its is the country whos in the cutting edge of rice development, but till now we are only able to cover 90% of the needs and we have to import the other 10%. Its in this conundrum due to Agrarian reform, they basically demonized the big land owners and cut up the land and gave it to the farmers, not thinking about economies of scale. Whereas a plantation can afford to buytractors and tillers... the individual farmer can only afford a water buffalo to till his land.

[a_very_ex_STAB]

I'd have to go back and look it up, but cities like Beijing and London supply a majority(2/3s for Beijing) of their farmed food using urban farming or at least are capable of doing so.

I very much doubt that! What exactly do you mean by 'urban farming'?
I can't imagine a Londoner's diet being either very plentiful or very varied if they tried to exist on what could be grown within the city (i.e. not very much!)

[Backwoodshunter]

Believe it or not, if China didn't apply the one-child policy in 1980s, the current food shortage worldwide will be much worse.

I kinda wish we'd see a similiar policy introduced here in the U.S.

[Backwoodshunter]

I very much doubt that! What exactly do you mean by 'urban farming'?
I can't imagine a Londoner's diet being either very plentiful or very varied if they tried to exist on what could be grown within the city (i.e. not very much!)

Urban farming is growing of food on roof tops, urban gardens, and the outskirts of large cities, taking advantage of alot of farmable land the most aren't aware is there. Plus Im not talking meat here just the vegetables.

[a_very_ex_STAB]

Urban farming is growing of food on roof tops, urban gardens, and the outskirts of large cities, taking advantage of alot of farmable land the most aren't aware is there. Plus Im not talking meat here just the vegetables.

OK fair enough. I know they do a lot of that in Cuba but things probably grow quicker there than in the UK.

[Backwoodshunter]

Yea I can't exactly be sure as I'm too lazy to look it up, but I guess its a positive system to what specific degree though I'm not sure.

Cuba is a large bastion of a pristine environmental atmosphere, alot of biodiversity. Unfortunately with Castro in his condition and his Brother(?) taking over, if they open up to us in the wrong manner they're going to spoil all that they have going for them real quick.

[a_very_ex_STAB]

Yea I can't exactly be sure as I'm too lazy to look it up, but I guess its a positive system to what specific degree though I'm not sure.


I saw a tv program here in the UK recently which focused on the urban farming in Havana. People have allotments in parks etc to grow their own vegetables primarily because of the economic conditions created by the trade embargo. Must be a major PITA to be working in a regular job and farming all the time in your spare time as well.

I don't know about Cuba but in the UK you'd have a hard time keeping your produce if food was short. Brits will steal anything that's not nailed down.

[seraosha]

"Urban Farming" is getting serious traction in regards to rooftop gardens, reclaiming undeveloped land into crops, "victory gardens", backyard gardening...it helps cool urban areas, provides cleaner air, local resources for produce, and reconnects people to their food...something that 1st world citizens are often distanced from.

Draconian measures are coming in regards to food distribution...luckily, I live in the only current world Super Power, as well as in farm lands and local production of rice, grains and beef with a nice full aquifer.

I am sympathetic to other folks in other parts of the world that can't feed themselves, but at the end of the day I and my family have food, and that's pretty much the end of my feeling responsible for others countries hunger.

Stop having kids, stop burning your trees, stop ****ting where you eat and start farming responsibly, or move somewhere where you can.

Or die in place.

[Backwoodshunter]

I don't know about Cuba but in the UK you'd have a hard time keeping your produce if food was short. Brits will steal anything that's not nailed down.

I know, god forbid any US cities had to seriously rely on them for sources. I could only imagine the crime and violence some people would undertake to get there food.

Hopefully urban farming will continue to rise in popularity, there are alot of urban reconnect programs springing up trying to get youth into these types of projects.

And Im with Seraosha, we have to try as hard as we can, but in the end of the day, I have my families plot, and all that really matters is me getting my family fed. Good luck to everyone else.

[Fifty Gut]

Stop having kids, stop burning your trees, stop ****ting where you eat and start farming responsibly, or move somewhere where you can.

Or die in place.

quoted for emphasis

[Merfeller]

Just heard on the news that wholesalers here in the States, like Sam's Club, are limiting the amount of rice a single customer can buy. A friend of mine who owns a bakery is also saying that he's having a mother of a time buying enough flower. He goes through 400 pounds per week and is facing the double problem of escalating price and decreased supply. Not rationing per se, but you can start to see where this is going...

[IraGlacialis]

I would frankly love urban rooftops to be converted to food gardens. Besides the obvious advantage of food, air filtering, and heat/water absorbtion, it would be quite aesthetically appealing.


Yeap, dump the stupidity. It's a horribly inefficient way of moving from point A to B. If we're that passionate about alternative ways of powering vehicles, then it's time to ditch internal combustion. Or atleast provide those interested with more alternatives.

I really doubt biofuels are anywhere near as efficient energy or cost wise compared to an electric car. Compare a solar collector charging a battery (simple one step) to the number of steps and time it takes to grow and then convert corn to ethanol. After all, in both cases they ultimately derive the energy from the sun. Just one does it more efficiently.

But electric cars... that's a whole other issue.
I would agree with ethanol being stupid. It cuts into food crops and isn't even efficent.

However, I may see a future in biodiesil. I don't know of any other use for switchgrass, or good crops that can be grown efficiently where switchgrss grows. As for algae, if sucessfu, most algae farms will be either in the desert, underground, or even urban areas; areas hardly conductive for food crops.
That and there are plans for algae farms to be connected to breweries, factories, and power plants (places that create lots of CO2). Besides converting the CO2 to O2, that will help filter out the air.

[homegrowncat]

I would frankly love urban rooftops to be converted to food gardens. Besides the obvious advantage of food, air filtering, and heat/water absorbtion, it would be quite aesthetically appealing.


I would agree with ethanol being stupid. It cuts into food crops and isn't even efficent.

However, I may see a future in biodiesil. I don't know of any other use for switchgrass, or good crops that can be grown efficiently where switchgrss grows. As for algae, if sucessfu, most algae farms will be either in the desert, underground, or even urban areas; areas hardly conductive for food crops.
That and there are plans for algae farms to be connected to breweries, factories, and power plants (places that create lots of CO2). Besides converting the CO2 to O2, that will help filter out the air.


Bio-diesel is not made out of switch grass. Bio-diesel is made out of oils from soybeans, canola, rapeseed, animal fat, used fry grease, palm oil etc. Algae has great potential. I have heard of excitment in the ethanol cirlces rergarding it because they will be able to use the CO2 they produce which would result in zero waste. Right now the breakdown for a bushel of corn turned into ethanol is 1/3 is turned into ethanol, 1/3 into CO2 and 1/3 into DDGS which are used in animal feed. There is also some experimentation going on right now to pull the left over corn oil out of the DDGS to make biodiesel thus making the whole process that much more efficent.

In regards to efficenty, according to Dr. Michael Wong at Argone Natioanl Labs, it takes .8 Btu of energy inputs to produce 1 Btu of energy via ethanol. For gasoline it takes 1.3 Btu of energy input to get 1 Btu out.

[nullterm]

Regardless of whether the biofuel source is edible or not, it still takes time, money, land to grow the crop, harvest it, and convert it to a usable fuel form. Time, money, land that could be used for food.

... or you just collect the solar energy directly and charge your batteries, just sayin'.

There's also using wind and tidal power to generated electricity. And for the fortunate few countries with it, steam powered turbines derived from geothermal.

[muttbutt]

Is that really the case?

I own a farm(dairy specifically) and I was left with the distinct impression that EU Quotas are more effective at protecting inefficient dairy farmers with exclusive control of their domestic market and preventing or limiting other nations from selling into it?

Or am I wrong?

In NZ, in the 80's, farm/ag subsidies were eliminated and it culled the farming industry for a generation...but the long-term end result was an industry that rose from the ashes and can now profitably sell to both the domestic NZ market and the competitive international market.

My GUESS is that the EU will be lobbied by farmers to keep barriers high to prevent their livelihoods from being destroyed.

What it means, again unless I'm mistaken, EU citizens pay more than they should to support EU farmers who are internationally inefficient.

3rd/4th world countries do not have the wealth to subsidize their farmers..so they have mostly very inefficient substinence farmers....everyone else has no choice but to pay wealthy western prices....that's my understanding of things.
No mate, some area's the farmers are probably inefficent, but in the highly industrialised countries, France/Germany/my own country ect, farmers are actually paid to "leave aside" land to produce less crops and produce, or even to plant forest's on them, it's the reason we have, "wine lake's,butter mountians" ect....just produced too much...there's probably also a lot of protectionism, but thats more to keep out stuff, beef from Brazil ect, farmers here have very good unions:|

[Britboy]

http://www2.nysun.com/article/74994

Interesting article on recent U.S. rice shortages...

[Backwoodshunter]

Yes but if we're catching on to a very sustainable form of biofuel, we can't push the development aside for traditonal farming methods for food production. Yes we need food production up to par, but alot of our traditional practices got us here in the first place. We need to start thinking, organic, sustainable and urban gardening to get us through what looks like some potential famines and food shortages/rationing.

Plus alot of the farmers I know tend to run, or favor diesel tractors, and there are alot of diesel vehicles out on the road, I'm sure its much more cost efficient to outfit or modify those diesel cars or even gasoline engines to run off some form of biodiesel than it would be to expect the populace to replace their automobiles with brand new solar/electric ones especially if its coming out of their pocket.

We just need to get American farmers shifted on to track, a few years ago corn, rice and other crops were at a ridiculous low, so many had to switch to producing a more viable crop. We get local production going, better implementaion, better logistics and distrubution and you could see the benefit of biofuels.

On another topic, if we do run into small food rationing or famine. It will get governments behind the idea that we need to watch our population and stop ours and most countries exponential growth.

[Backwoodshunter]

No mate, some area's the farmers are probably inefficent, but in the highly industrialised countries, France/Germany/my own country ect, farmers are actually paid to "leave aside" land to produce less crops and produce, or even to plant forest's on them, it's the reason we have, "wine lake's,butter mountians" ect....just produced too much...there's probably also a lot of protectionism, but thats more to keep out stuff, beef from Brazil ect, farmers here have very good unions:|

Can you provide any evidence or support to that claim?

[muttbutt]

Can you provide any evidence or support to that claim?
what claim?.....

[Backwoodshunter]

That there are farmers who are paid to keep land set aside to slow production.

[a_very_ex_STAB]

No mate, some area's the farmers are probably inefficent, but in the highly industrialised countries, France/Germany/my own country ect, farmers are actually paid to "leave aside" land to produce less crops and produce, or even to plant forest's on them, it's the reason we have, "wine lake's,butter mountians" ect....just produced too much...there's probably also a lot of protectionism, but thats more to keep out stuff, beef from Brazil ect, farmers here have very good unions:|

x2 about the UK. Farmers here are very efficient. Farming was 'intensivized' if that's the correct word prior to, during and after WW2 (for fairly obvious reasons) and has remained so. I don't know about France and Germany but I can't imagine its that much different there.

[Backwoodshunter]

But are any of them paid to be less productive? That would be really strange, at least here in the US.

[Bulletproof]

Good thread we have here! Food crisis isn't one of those cycles that appear when there is too many people?

[a_very_ex_STAB]

But are any of them paid to be less productive? That would be really strange, at least here in the US.

As muttbutt said some land is 'set aside' for environmental reasons (I don't know how much) but here in the UK the agricultural sector has often been criticised for being too intensive and too efficient. At an EU level this has resulted in many surpluses over the years (although I have to say you don't hear much or anything at all about the 'Butter Mountains' and 'Wine Lakes' these days)

[Backwoodshunter]

Good thread we have here! Food crisis isn't one of those cycles that appear when there is too many people?

Essentially, the cost of shipping going up, outsourcing and buying food stuffs internationally, too many mouths, to much waste all the great things of big population.

In regards to ex stab, hmm thats pretty fascinating, never heard that before. I guess we could use the european efficiency right about now.

[Mordoror]

Stop having kids, stop burning your trees, stop ****ting where you eat and start farming responsibly, or move somewhere where you can.

Or die in place.take no offense but it is a typical westerner answer to a problem much more complex than that

stop having kids : - Ok but a kid is hand to be used for working then producing food or monney and sustaining the family, especillay when the adults gone incapacited (by accident or infectious diseases that are plentiful in tropical countries)

stop burning your trees - how to cook?. Oil is horribly expensive. electricity also when you can have it. Coal is seldom present .... burn the forest ... moreover it gives new lands for new cultures...
then you can hope to feed your familiy and buy dresses, drugs and medics, shoes (or try so)
of course the soil in tropical area is fragile .... after 4-5 year you need to go elsewhere ... but is it totaly your fault ??
50 to 90 % of your production is done for western countries (or developping countries like China and India) so what remains is seldom sufficient to assure your food
Or the owner of your land ask you to produce one monoculture that brings money (not to you so much of course but to state or private cooperatives)
However monocultures for food (bananas, cacao, coffee) or for biofuel (palm oil, colza...) do not feed you and your childs

-start farming responsibly ?
with the dumping done by western states that make the price of your production more expensive on the market (even with low cost workers) than western or US productions
when multinationals are doing monopole on seeds, anti-pest products etc .... and that when you have bought seeds one time, you are forced to do it forever (look the suicide seeds from Monsanto....)

And on the other side :
.Why in certain countries the total meals are estimated to be around 3500 - 4000 kCal when the average active man needs is around 2500 kCal t

Why westerners eat meat 2 times (at least by day)
We need physiologically not more than 100 g of animal proteins by day (top estimation). Why some protions are reaching 250 or even 500 g ?
When you know that to produce 1 kCal of animal proteins you need something like 50 kCal of vegetal kCal and 50 kCal of burned oil

or when you know that around 2/3 of the fish captured is used to make food for bovines or porks or anything that we look normal in our dishes but which come to an impressive wasting of natural and fuel ressources regarding our true needs

As westerners we should also look what we are doing, how were are burning our ressource in a way that is not needed. The effort shall be done also by us. How can you expect from others to act wisely when they look at the wasting we are doing also

We are all on the same ship (the earth) ... if the system collapses (and it is going a good way toward that) we will all be wasted, not only the poor blacks in Africa or poor yellow men in South Asia. Social disorder, war for ressources, epidemy, economy collapse, water shortage, oil shortage will not be restrictaid to certain unlucky people but will affect us all in one way or another .....

[Shadowstorm]

Agree with the waste of time and money but

Care to elaborate on this one?
Will, just look at the Amazon Rain forest for example. People started to destroy parts of the Amazon for the farms to use sugarcane as a fuel source since the late 70's.

[randomguy]

The only way any real change is gonna happen is when people start dieing. Only after 3000 people died on 9/11 did people start reanalyzing airport security and the threat of terrorism. Its sad that society has to work that way.

[Backwoodshunter]

No one said this was a third world problem alone, alot of the fingers are accurately pointed at the first world and the socially irresponisble companies that create alot of the market trends or problems. I think alot of us understand that its not easy, but with alot of cooperation, especially through efforts groups like the Peace Corps, assisting 3rd world nations with their environmental problems. We can try our best to fix our(as in the earths) problem.

But in all fairness Mordoror, seraosha's post was right. Third world or first world, we all have parts in the current potential crisis. But when it comes down to the end of the day, James Howard Kunstlers plan(short version) is best. Move to a small town, make connections, try and improve the self reliance of your community, other than that hope and wait for the best, because you're on your own.

All that really matters to us is when things start falling apart, that you can handle your own affairs and no one elses.

[Shadowstorm]

More and more I see these type of crisis like food, oil and other stuff going on in this world, more and more I see this world headed for another major world war.

[Mordoror]

No one said this was a third world problem alone, alot of the fingers are accurately pointed at the first world and the socially irresponisble companies that create alot of the market trends or problems. I think alot of us understand that its not easy, but with alot of cooperation, especially through efforts groups like the Peace Corps, assisting 3rd world nations with their environmental problems. We can try our best to fix our(as in the earths) problem.

But in all fairness Mordoror, seraosha's post was right. Third world or first world, we all have parts in the current potential crisis. But when it comes down to the end of the day, James Howard Kunstlers plan(short version) is best. Move to a small town, make connections, try and improve the self reliance of your community, other than that hope and wait for the best, because you're on your own.

All that really matters to us is when things start falling apart, that you can handle your own affairs and no one elses.

100 % approved
except for the one point .... the point is to make as far as possible the things not to start falling apart....
after of course, you are on your own.... but 50 000 years of evolution from the caveman to now and suddenly coming back to the tribes days because a mere few (here i am talking mainly of the corrupted top of the big food, oil and energy managing directors and chairmans being from whatever country) want to enrich themselves with such amount of money that even in an entire life, they couldn't spend it will be very sad

[Bulletproof]

stop having kids : - Ok but a kid is hand to be used for working then producing food or monney and sustaining the family, especillay when the adults gone incapacited (by accident or infectious diseases that are plentiful in tropical countries)

They can't feed theirs kids in the first place yeah, parents got AIDS so does the children, very useful. For the cooking they could use a little oven instead of a bonfire.

[Nano]

Good thread some valid moral points about western prosperity and biofuels blame game. Here are the facts. There is no food crisis just a money crisis. How can that be?There is enough food to feed everyone and some. The biofuels excuse is just one being used to explain it away by the pundits. The fact is that developing countries have had this economic disparity between their agricultural production and that of the west's. That my friends is agricultural subsidies. The west has plentiful bs politicians, but unlike the developing countries who can only hoard food the west pays their farmers to be "profitable". Right at this very moment there are people who are speculators hoarding/storing massive amounts of food for when bs politicians in countries start their own hoarding of food they cash in. Hoarding food is a triple edged sword. On the plus side one feels that it guarantees food for their own population and it does short term at least. The other two negative consequences which is increased food prices on the global market which leads to increased prices at home make food all the more expensive not scarce. The long term and perhaps un-seen consequence is the drop in local food production. Local farmers in developing countries have to deal with the same increased costs of producing food as western food producers and that is fertilizer,labor and equipment. Thus if one hoards away food the only outcome is fixed lower prices for local farmers to sell at and less production as farmers go out of business because costs are > price.Here is where my observation of the money crisis comes in.

The fall in the value of the reserve and thus trade currency the dollar has lead to increase prices on all levels and most importantly the basics. Energy and higher oil prices have lead to an overall price increase on all products.
Products such as fertilizers and capital equipment used in farming is whats mainly been to blame for the majority of the increased price of food on markets not simply bio-fuels. How do you fix it. Developing countries have to gather themselves to compete against the west's heavily subsidized farmers. In a way developing countries have already been at work through wto talks that lead to a deadlock. The best thing developing countries can do is to stop hoarding food. Hoarding food only aids the enemy the western farmer who is himself speculating and holding on to a % of his harvest as he
expects you to hoard driving food prices even higher. The thing to do is simple increase food production by not fixing prices on your own farmers, but instead aid them by importing the most efficient farming techniques the world over. The most important thing is to leverage your labor costs vs western costs. If anything developing countries should be able to kick the living hell out of the western farmers, but they don't because of a socialized not a self-sufficient mindset that farmers and politicians have in their own countries. Food hoarding like energy capturing as the Chinese do it only leads to increased food prices and to other unsavory things like black markets, organized crime etc.

[Zlatko]

Solutions for this ****ed up planet:
-1 Kid per family for the next 20 years in developing nations
-Artificial Trees
-Solar Plants & More Nuclear Energy Development
-More Solar + Electric Cars

[Flagg]

Sorry but thats just blatanly wrong.
M3 growth can be changed due to a various of reasons without affecting price levels. For example right now with all the confusion about the CDO's, there is a big capital stream from longterm investments to short term investments.
Hence M3 is growing really fast (longterm investments dont get included in that one) while this has nothing to do with rising prices.

Looks like a conspiracy theory to me.


So I guess it's just an incredible coincidence that M3 has absolutely exploded in the past few years( far, far in excess of actual economic growth) and US Dollar denominated commodity prices have exploded in lockstep like a pair of F15 Eagles performing a Viking Departure? Just a coincidence?

"...inflation is not defined as the increase in prices but as the increase in the supply of money that causes the increase in prices i.e. inflation is a cause rather than an effect."

The effect........that's people starving like 80's "We Are the World" Ethiopians all over again......in regards to inflation(one reason for the current food crisis) and it's effect related to this thread.





I know CPI in most countries leave out energy prices but keep in mind that this is reflected in all other commodities.
Main reason for leaving them out was that this has protected us from even greater inflation due to automatic indexation of various government handouts.

Of course it's in government's best interest to lie and understate inflation......they get to pay out fewer bits of depreciating paper to their employees and beneficiaries, plus they get to collect more taxes since income tax threshholds are not ratcheted up to match real inflation.

Have a read of "heuristics" bullsh!t and how it relates to inflation calculation(or should I say fabrication)

[Backwoodshunter]

In regards to Nano

With all due respect I think your giving alittle too much respect to the economy and powers that be, and are overlooking what is a combination of economics and just simple humans making mistakes.

Yes we can adjust the flow, encourage the flux or the market by subsidizing farmers, and yes big corporations are having there way with the food and energy markets and are pulling strings. But personally I'd call this an environmental crisis not just a food or money one.

We have food, energy, population, waste, space, and the destruction of our ecosystems to worry about. Our populations, regardless of first or third, is exponentially increasing. The common misconception, is that we can have our cake and eat it too. Third world nations(India, Pakistan, China) can't have the same quality of life as us here in the west. We need to try and reduce population, and at the same time reduce our consumption, waste, and footprint.

Yes I can see how hoarding of food leads to the increase of the price, but add in the cost of fuel and transportation, then add in the cost of wasted top soil, spoiled and drained aquifers, the pesticides and similar chemicals which are finding there ways into the groundwater and surrounding ecosystem, all which comes back to haunt the human population and agricultural output.

We need to realize that the way we are doing things is wrong, we need socially responsible business behind new sustainable living methods, and quick. Economics can only be blamed so much, sooner or later, we have to realize it comes down to a limited amount of space/resources for the human race.

[IraGlacialis]

Bio-diesel is not made out of switch grass. Bio-diesel is made out of oils from soybeans, canola, rapeseed, animal fat, used fry grease, palm oil etc. Algae has great potential. I have heard of excitment in the ethanol cirlces rergarding it because they will be able to use the CO2 they produce which would result in zero waste. Right now the breakdown for a bushel of corn turned into ethanol is 1/3 is turned into ethanol, 1/3 into CO2 and 1/3 into DDGS which are used in animal feed. There is also some experimentation going on right now to pull the left over corn oil out of the DDGS to make biodiesel thus making the whole process that much more efficent.

In regards to efficenty, according to Dr. Michael Wong at Argone Natioanl Labs, it takes .8 Btu of energy inputs to produce 1 Btu of energy via ethanol. For gasoline it takes 1.3 Btu of energy input to get 1 Btu out.
Damnit I got things mixed up. You are right; switchgrass is being looked at for ethanol, not biodiesel.

The only problem with biodiesil so far is that it needs to be mixed up with regular diesel to prevent it from jelling in cool weather.

I am still having hopes for algea. It would be nice to have algae farms set out in the Sahara and industrail cities, places that are good at producing any other kind of crop.

[Nano]

Backwoodshunter I don't disagree with your sentiment about doing things "better", but socially responsible business is a misnomer. Businesses and entrepreneurs will come up with a business models that best suits them (eg. long term profit) If business and government can sell it to the masses that paying more for an environmentally sustainable model is in their interests then that's their business gain.

I myself am tired of all the idiotic social engineering that goes on here in California. In the country that was largely founded on a taxation dispute with its mother Britain it has become a poor working tax payers hell.

The state of California is considering a tax or a "fee" as they call it on plastic bags used for groceries. While this may seem to be the right thing to do for the environment it is not for that purpose. The reason for that tax is revenue. Revenue that the tax pigs in Sacramento need to keep themselves in office by offering the poor more handouts for less work.

I for one was going to start my own business through savings and very tight management of spending. I however found it that being single and working is not best for saving my earnings. 20% of my income is taxed away and I never get to see it till the end of the year and depreciated at that. Guess what happened someone else beat me to the punch with the product I was developing on a piece meal basis with what little uncle sam left of my check. Maybe I would have been able to get to promoting it and getting a loan after I had sufficient demand for it from a bank, but now I will never know. Now a Taiwan/Chicom has the prospect of cornering another piece of another market.

That product is widely used in PCs it is thermal compound. I still have not given up and continue to improve it as a poor mans budget allows, but realistically I have a small chance in hell in competing against a Chicom.

I personally have seen and worked for companies that are very unethical in both hiring and business practices, but one thing they are is profitable and that is in large is due to those practices. That is why I want to start my own company someday so I don't have to work for and with assholes for the rest of my life.

Why did I tell you all of this? The reason for this is that economics is not to blame it is simply a means to explain the workings of human society as it is. One can always alter it for one's own purpose environment, socialism, capitalism and good intentions, but that is not economics that is ideology. I give economics no respect and it is what is as a result of observation and study, but most importantly reality. It is a tool not an excuse. People will act as they do for their own selfish reasons one can choose not to.

[Backwoodshunter]

Well I'm sorry to hear about the loss of your idea to a big corp. such things happen all too often. But to be completely honest I've worked for socially irresponsible companies as well, and personally I don't care at all for the human factor. Yes it is best to keep employees happy and managemant methods that do are more productive than those who don't. But when it all comes own to it, I believe in the earth first, and I don't mean socially responsible as in taking care of its people. I mean it as not lying, cooking books, embezzeling or false advertising their greenness.

Through my own research and reading, its nearly always better to go with a sustainable approach to business, from waste, to construction, to long term manufacturing or resource procurement. Sustainable eco friendly methods are usually more expensive up front, but cut costs way beyond expectations down the line. Thats what I beleive, govt tax subsidies for green sustainable businesses and investment in the right companies and individuals are what we want.

If people are interested read "Let My People Go Surfing" by Yvonne Chouinard, the owner of Patagonia outdoor appearal. There are many companies that are following sustainable practices and usually it leads to bigger dividends. Now we just need more government subsidies, better management, government guidelines and standards, then we can get the green movement moving. After that we work on the happiness and well being of the employees.

[Blackwater11114]

Sustainable eco friendly methods are usually more expensive up front, but cut costs way beyond expectations down the line. Thats what I beleive, govt tax subsidies for green sustainable businesses and investment in the right companies and individuals are what we want.

If people are interested read "Let My People Go Surfing" by Yvonne Chouinard, the owner of Patagonia outdoor appearal. There are many companies that are following sustainable practices and usually it leads to bigger dividends.

You might be interested in this link

http://www.treepower.org/biomass/quickfacts.html

[Horna]

Just my 2 cents... food crops used for biofuel an issue? Seriously, they are not. I would be more inclined to look at the meat & dairy industry as one of the culprits.

Has anyone ever compared the economic, environmental and ecological impact of producing meat vs. the ones that producing cereals and crops have? The numbers are out there, producing meat is grossly inefficient and wastefull way of feeding people.

It takes a great deal more resources (water, energy, farming estate etc.) to get an X amount of energy from meat. Insane amounts of food that is perfectly suitable for human consumption (and could feed a lot more people than the meat that is produced) is fed to livestock. Not to mention the production of methane & other environmental waste associated with meat industry.

I am not telling anyone to completely abandon meat but reducing the amount people consume could have a major ecological, economical and environmental impact. The simple fact is that people really don't need to eat meat or other animal based products to live perfectly healthy and comfortable lives.

The situation is only getting worse as developing nations try to achieve western standards of living. It will lead to more waste and wastefulness (meat consumption will rise).

[J-10]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/feedarticle?id=7478077
China trader says rice exports to continue
*******, Tuesday April 22 2008
By Niu Shuping

BEIJING, April 22 (*******) - China, which produces nearly a third of the world's rice, will continue exports this year despite Beijing's effort to discourage grains shipments abroad, an official with the country's top trader said on Tuesday.

News of more rice from China, which ranked sixth in the world with over 4 percent of global exports last year, may help temper the fears that have pushed up prices more than twofold this year due in part to export curbs by big suppliers fighting domestic inflation.

The rally has added to food-related inflation, caused food riots in parts of Africa and heightened fears about food security for importers, but China -- which holds about half of the world's rice stocks -- appears well set to ride out the turmoil.

"We will continue to export a proper amount this year, but it is hard to say how much now," Yang Hong, head of the rice department at state grains trader COFCO Co. Ltd, told *******.

She said COFCO was in talks over new contracts, even though Beijing hasn't issued new quotas for overseas shipments.

"We don't see any problem in domestic supplies," said Yang, but declined to give more details.

China's rice exports rose 7 percent to 1.32 million tonnes last year, equal to only about 1 percent of its production. Shipments have accelerated this year, climbing 39 percent in the first quarter to over 600,000 tonnes, according to official government data released on Tuesday. [ID:nPEK304966]
That includes 255,400 tonnes in March, despite the fact that Beijing has yet to renew its annual rice export permits, the last batch of which expired before March 1.

China's State Council, or the cabinet, said last month Beijing would restrict grain exports to ensure food safety at home, particularly after food prices had helped drive the country's inflation to a 12-year high in March.

It has abolished a 13 percent export tax rebate and imposed a 5 percent export tax, but that may do little to deter traders from trying to take advantage of export prices that are as much as double depressed domestic rates.

One Japanese grain trader said Chinese short-grain rice was traded at around $970 a tonne, FOB, in March.

BUYING FRENZY

Benchmark Thai Rice prices have leapt by 150 percent this year in what traders call a short-term buying frenzy by importers who had allowed stockpiles to dwindle to near their lowest in 20 years and feared that export restrictions might leave them short.

Analysts say the sense of panic should subside as stocks rebuild, but the market also faces the longer-term pressure of sharply rising agricultural costs, eroding cropland in the face of rapid development and growing demand, partly from poor consumers already hit by a doubling in the price of wheat.

While growing populations in developing countries in African and the Middle East drive up consumption, China faces the opposite trend as its increasingly well-off urbanites eat more meat and fish, and less of the staple rice.

The China National Grain and Oils Information Centre estimates rice consumption is decreasing by between 500,000 tonnes to 1 million tonnes a year, said one analyst. Last year paddy rice production rose 2 percent to 186.5 million tonnes.

Easing demand and several years of bumper harvests have put rice prices in China <0#ASRICE-CN> among the world's lowest, if not the lowest, allowing the government to bolster stocks.

Beijing has agreed to buy 1.75 million tonnes of rice for reserves in the northeast aiming to support prices and encourage farmers to grow more, an official said last week. Premier Wen Jiabao said last month that China's rice stocks were 40 to 50 million tonnes, which would be more than half the world's total.

Grains officials said rice farmers in the northeast, including Heilongjiang, had difficulties in selling their crop.

"The critical thing is the weather in the next 60 days. If weather is fine in the next 60 days, I don't think the government would hold back old (rice) stocks," said a senior grain trader in Shanghai, who declined to be identified.
"In general, China had enough rice and wheat. And rice has a political leverage. If one country does not have enough rice, China can sell some, it is good for the relationship." (Additional reporting by Nao Nakanishi in Hong Kong, Editing by Jonathan Leff)

[angry cow]

Thank god the Chinese have kept a relatively cool head during this mess. I'm constantly impressed by how economically savvy they are.

[Parx400]

Backwoodshunter I don't disagree with your sentiment about doing things "better", but socially responsible business is a misnomer. Businesses and entrepreneurs will come up with a business models that best suits them (eg. long term profit) If business and government can sell it to the masses that paying more for an environmentally sustainable model is in their interests then that's their business gain.

I myself am tired of all the idiotic social engineering that goes on here in California. In the country that was largely founded on a taxation dispute with its mother Britain it has become a poor working tax payers hell.

The state of California is considering a tax or a "fee" as they call it on plastic bags used for groceries. While this may seem to be the right thing to do for the environment it is not for that purpose. The reason for that tax is revenue. Revenue that the tax pigs in Sacramento need to keep themselves in office by offering the poor more handouts for less work.

I for one was going to start my own business through savings and very tight management of spending. I however found it that being single and working is not best for saving my earnings. 20% of my income is taxed away and I never get to see it till the end of the year and depreciated at that. Guess what happened someone else beat me to the punch with the product I was developing on a piece meal basis with what little uncle sam left of my check. Maybe I would have been able to get to promoting it and getting a loan after I had sufficient demand for it from a bank, but now I will never know. Now a Taiwan/Chicom has the prospect of cornering another piece of another market.

That product is widely used in PCs it is thermal compound. I still have not given up and continue to improve it as a poor mans budget allows, but realistically I have a small chance in hell in competing against a Chicom.

I personally have seen and worked for companies that are very unethical in both hiring and business practices, but one thing they are is profitable and that is in large is due to those practices. That is why I want to start my own company someday so I don't have to work for and with assholes for the rest of my life.

Why did I tell you all of this? The reason for this is that economics is not to blame it is simply a means to explain the workings of human society as it is. One can always alter it for one's own purpose environment, socialism, capitalism and good intentions, but that is not economics that is ideology. I give economics no respect and it is what is as a result of observation and study, but most importantly reality. It is a tool not an excuse. People will act as they do for their own selfish reasons one can choose not to.


Normaly I disagree with you Nano but you are 100% correct on this one. The problem comes from where we tax people. Liberals in Ca would love to tax income and payroll to pay for all these god damn programs they think up and for the over paid state workers, Unions etc. They know if they did that the voters would not let them stay in office. So they go tax companies and add "fees" on everything. Problem is when the economy is not doing well the money from taxes drys up. people also choose not to purchase things with added fees. I work for a company that does oversight for State IT projects and the amount of money wasted or lost by those people is incrediable.

[Backwoodshunter]

Thanks for the link Blackwater that helpful info. Horna is also got a good point, I can't remember the amount but unfortunately meat, as in beef, is such a large producer of waste. The amount we have to throw away just to get a pound of meat is outrageous.

[Mordoror]

Just my 2 cents... food crops used for biofuel an issue? Seriously, they are not. I would be more inclined to look at the meat & dairy industry as one of the culprits.

Has anyone ever compared the economic, environmental and ecological impact of producing meat vs. the ones that producing cereals and crops have? The numbers are out there, producing meat is grossly inefficient and wastefull way of feeding people.

It takes a great deal more resources (water, energy, farming estate etc.) to get an X amount of energy from meat. Insane amounts of food that is perfectly suitable for human consumption (and could feed a lot more people than the meat that is produced) is fed to livestock. Not to mention the production of methane & other environmental waste associated with meat industry.

I am not telling anyone to completely abandon meat but reducing the amount people consume could have a major ecological, economical and environmental impact. The simple fact is that people really don't need to eat meat or other animal based products to live perfectly healthy and comfortable lives.

The situation is only getting worse as developing nations try to achieve western standards of living. It will lead to more waste and wastefulness (meat consumption will rise).

+1

it is one (big) part of the issue ....

[Backwoodshunter]

Too bad as I do love my meat, I'm guessing poultry has a much smaller impact. I personally don't think we could remove such a major staple from our diets, just manage it better.

[Mordoror]

Too bad as I do love my meat, I'm guessing poultry has a much smaller impact. I personally don't think we could remove such a major staple from our diets, just manage it better.

it is an educationnal issue but as i said we physiologically do not need the amount of meat we use to eat everyday (in fact it is hurting our wealth more than we can expect ... eating too much red-meat (beef, etc) increase colorectal cancer probability for example)

it is also a big monney issue as a lot of food companies get much more monney on meat than on crude products

and yes poultry is as bad for environment and crope using that other cattle keeping

[homegrowncat]

Damnit I got things mixed up. You are right; switchgrass is being looked at for ethanol, not biodiesel.

The only problem with biodiesil so far is that it needs to be mixed up with regular diesel to prevent it from jelling in cool weather.

I am still having hopes for algea. It would be nice to have algae farms set out in the Sahara and industrail cities, places that are good at producing any other kind of crop.


It can be hard to keep everything straight when talking about feedstocks. Biodiesel is a great fuel, but biodiesel producers are getting killed right now because the cost of soyoil has increased in price so much. Algae hopefully has a great future.