I have always been a fan of dolphins but after last night’s Oscars I am an even bigger fan. That’s because in the best Documentary Feature category Food Inc., the diatribe against American agriculture, got a good old fashioned smack down by The Cove.
The Cove” follows animal activist Richard O’Barry — who once trained dolphins for the television show “Flipper” — alongside a team of filmmakers as they attempt to document dolphin slaughter in the Japanese fishing village of Taiji.
Food Inc. shows filmmaker Robert Kenner attempting to slaughter American ranchers and family farmers and send us all running back to backyard gardens and 1900’s vintage farms. He shows us the worst examples of how livestock is raised in this country and also wants us to question the healthiness of corn in our food supply.
Food Inc. is clearly a piece of “food advocacy work” rather than honest journalism, according to Dan Glickman and he ought to know. The current chairman of the Motion Picture Association of American is a former U.S. Secretary of Agriculture under President Bill Clinton. (Maybe someone should do a documentary on how the Ag Secretary makes the pilgrimage from DC to Hollywood. Now that would at least be interesting.)
Family corn farmers represented by the National Corn Growers Association lashed out at Food Inc. in advance of last night’s festive event saying the documentary shouldn’t win the Oscar because it not only grossed out grocery shoppers, but was unfair to the nation’s farmers.
The dictionary says the noun documentary describes a film or TV program presenting the facts about a person or event. Kenner’s propaganda clearly should have never made it to the red carpet.
Perhaps now we can relegate Food Inc. to collect dust on the back shelves of video stores where it belongs and farmers can go back to producing the safest and most abundant food supply in the world.
The latest attack on atrazine was all over the major news outlets today – the weed killer makes boy frogs into girl frogs.
To illustrate this, they had a photo of frog porn – an allegedly normal male frog mating with an atrazine-freakazoid-male-turned-female frog. Don’t feel bad if you can’t tell the difference – neither can they. The picture was provided by study author Tyrone Hayes with the University of California at Berkeley, so we have to take his word for it.
Of course, it would be funnier if it did not potentially impact the livelihood of farmers who rely on this important herbicide. According to Alex Avery, Director of Research and Education at the Hudson Institute’s Center for Global Food Issues, the study’s author is an “admitted anti-atrazine activist.”
“Dr. Tyrone Hayes has spent more than a decade allied with eco-activists peddling scare stories due to alleged health effects from atrazine. Yet despite his decade-long search and after more than 50 years of widespread use of this herbicide by farmers to minimize soil erosion while combating weeds, Hayes can offer no compelling real-world evidence that atrazine poses any appreciable risk to amphibian populations anywhere,” Avery stated.
This is not a new issue for atrazine. In fact, EPA has already looked into such previous claims but dismissed the concerns as unfounded. The problem is, this story literally has sex appeal. No one will care if it’s true or not – they have fornicating frogs and great jokes to give the story repeatability. With atrazine currently under review by the EPA, this new study will require another round of review. Better hop to it!
A recent online New York Times editorial praised the Environmental Protection Agency’s decision supporting the expansion of biofuels production however, the praise was too lavish, according to many close to the issue.
As seems to be more and more common in government, EPA’s attempts to mollify all parties involved, resulted in a watered-down decision that missed the mark. The source of the EPA and NY Times gaff is their inability to expose the Indirect Land Use Change (ILUC) argument for the red herring it really represents.
For those unfamiliar with the concept a “red herring” is a deliberate attempt to divert or deflects attention away from the real subject at hand, and ILUC proponents deserve a nod for their adept sleight of hand regarding the future of biofuels. Instead of focusing on the documented economic, environmental, and energy contributions of biofuels, we find ourselves debating the tenuous connection between America’s production of corn and land use impacts in sovereign countries elsewhere in the world.
According to the Renewable Fuels Association, these so-called indirect land use impacts have questionable scientific validity. In fact, more than 100 scientists and Ph.D.’s have stated: “The ability to predict this alleged effect depends on using an economic model to predict worldwide carbon effects, and the outcomes are unusually sensitive to the assumptions made by the researchers conducting the model runs. In addition, this field of science is in its nascent stage, is controversial in much of the scientific community, and is only being enforced against biofuels.”
That’s RFA’s way of saying a lot reasonable and reputable folks don’t trust the subjective nature of computer modeling which is in its infancy, let alone using something as important as biofuels as the crash-test dummy for this new assumption rather than fact-based driven methodology.
Darrin Ihnen, president of the National Corn Growers Association, laid bare the biggest argument refuting ILUC in his response to the New York Times. “Upwardly trending corn yields disprove this theory. In 2009, for example, farmers grew enough corn to break 2007’s production record, and we did so harvesting nearly seven million fewer acres.”
In fact, corn growers have developed a new paradigm regarding the future of corn production. Scientists have unlocked the intricate corn genome and in doing so have set the stage for a national yield average of nearly 300 bushels per acre within two decades. Productive capacity is increasing so rapidly that the U.S. corn farmers has grown enough corn to meet the needs of all markets while biofuel production has soared.
Ihnen pointedly says “those who wrote the studies you cite should get out into the fields and talk to the many farmers who are not only beating the Department of Agriculture’s average corn yield, but also doubling it in some circumstances. They will see the great potential the Corn Belt has for feeding and fueling the world.”
It could become the next great fuel source from the agricultural community. A Nebraska-based biomass supplier and manufacturer has debuted a product it touts as “Coal from the Farm.”
Next Step Biofuels has launched PowerPellets, a green fuel made from corn stover – all the leaves, cobs and stalks leftover after the corn is harvested – that burns like coal and will help with that state’s Renewable Portfolio Standard laws that require utilities to generate more of their power from renewable sources:
According to Next Step COO Russ Zeeck, PowerPellets solve the logistical and operational problems that have thus far prevented wide-scale use of biomass to generate electricity. “PowerPellets overcome the three major problems that utilities have had with biomass,” said Zeeck. “First, unlike raw biomass, PowerPellets are easy and affordable to ship and store. Second, unlike other pelletized biomass, PowerPellets are hard and friable which means they pulverize and feed just like coal; PowerPellets can be folded into a coal-fired plant’s operations with little or no additional capital. And, third, because Next Step makes PowerPellets from corn stover – America’s most abundant source of renewable biomass – there is a deep, reliable and price-stable supply.”
Next Step Biofuels says the PowerPellets were recently tested and found to do what was claimed of them during rigorous testing conducted at the Energy & Environmental Research Center at the University of North Dakota. The company is negotiating with several utilities to supply PowerPellets starting next year.
In what is being reported to be the busiest day to date at the UN Climate talks in Copenhagen, Denmark, National Corn Growers Association (NCGA) President Darrin Ihnen had a private meeting with US Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack. The time was spent discussing NCGA’s perspective on climate change and several other pressing issues.
Key to the visit was NCGA’s reiterating the fact that there are serious concerns among our members with the cap-and-trade proposal in Congress. Ihnen noted that if significant progress for agriculture is not achieved in the legislation, we will come under increased pressure to oppose the bill outright.
NCGA continues to be a part of the debate and development of climate legislation in order to make it as farmer-friendly as possible but Ihnen, a farmer from South Dakota, pointed out it’s difficult to convince farmers that a new “green” economy will be good for them when the renewable fuel that we already produce comes under such regular attacks from the environmental community. (more…)
Agriculture in the U.S. represents 7% of the GHG (Greenhouse Gas) problem but 20% of the potential solution, according to US Department of Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsak. National Corn Growers Association (NCGA) President Darrin Ihnen, on hand to hear Sec. Vilsak speak at Agriculture and Rural Development Day at the Copenhagen at the Climate Change Conference, said the Secretary emphasized the linkage between climate change and food security as the most important challenge facing agriculture. According to Vilsack, our efforts should focus on three areas — research, adaptation and mitigation.
Vilsak, the keynote speaker at Ag Day at the University of Copehagen, also was heard to remark:
- Farmers should evaluate new business models based on carbon mitigation.
- Governments should drive environmental markets
- Sustainable farming is not just applicable to small operations. Large farms can be sustainable.
- The new research arm at USDA, the National Institute for Food and Agriculture (NIFA), will focus significant resources on climate change adaptation.
- USDA Extension Service will need greater resources to help farmers adapt
- We need to move away from carbon based fertilizers
- Food aid for the developing world should mean more than just providing food but also sharing technologies and modern practices to help growers become more productive
- Post-harvest storage facilities will become increasingly important to limit waste in our production systems
More than 74 percent of the agriculture-based GHG emissions come from developing countries, says Ohio Corn Growers Executive Director Dwayne Siekman in his blog from Copehagen.
“It is obvious that U.S. farmers have been and will continue to do their job, but the rest of the world believes the U.S. should pay to bring everyone to their level, and that developing countries want the U.S. to shoulder much of the load in GHG mitigation,” he said. (more…)
It’s official now. Humans beings are polluting the planet just by exhaling.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency this week officially declared carbon dioxide, the stuff we exhale, as one of six greenhouse gases that “threaten the public health and welfare of the American people.”
According to EPA, on-road vehicles contribute more than 23 percent of total U.S. GHG emissions, but how much do humans contribute? From what I can figure – and correct me if I am wrong – there are 305 million people in the United States who exhale an average of 12 times per minute. There is approximately .037 grams of CO2 in each exhalation, which means we breathe out about 135 million grams of CO2 into the atmosphere EVERY MINUTE. That seems like a lot to me. Adding in the entire world population of nearly seven billion people (since everyone breathes, but not everyone drives a car) it’s up to about 3 billion grams per minute, if my math is right. So, I figure that if we would just exhale less, we could save the planet.
Seriously, the EPA conclusion could have serious ramifications for agriculture. The National Corn Growers Association (NCGA) has serious concerns with the implications regulating GHG emissions could have for America’s corn farmers and the livestock industry. The American Farm Bureau Federation released a statement saying that EPA’s decision “could carry severe consequences for America’s farmers and ranchers.”
Despite the so-called “Climate gate” emails that have raised questions in the last couple of weeks about the manipulation of scientific data with regard to global warming caused by GHG emissions, EPA states that, “Scientific consensus shows that as a result of human activities, GHG concentrations in the atmosphere are at record high levels and data shows that the Earth has been warming over the past 100 years, with the steepest increase in warming in recent decades.”
You would think that would cause world leaders and our own government to at least want to take a second look at the whole issue to see if there really is a major cause for concern.
You would think, but then again – don’t hold your breath waiting for it to happen.
Beloved American author Samuel Clemens, known to the world as simply Mark Twain, led a storied, colorful and sometimes dangerous life. It was one of these near misses with catastrophe that led to the now famous line “The reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated.”
This quote seems to ring very true for ethanol fuel today as well. To read the volume of tripe being spread about by certain anti-ethanol factions in the grocery, environmental and big oil industries you would think ethanol is dead indeed.
Thank goodness the truth is much like Mr. Twain and proves to be pretty resilient over time. In the petroleum world there is one particular publication, albeit published only once a year, that is known for putting the spin aside and addressing energy issues in a realistic and truthful manner.
ExxonMobil’s “Energy Outlook,” the company’s annual forecast about the industry, which is set to be released any day, points to increased adoption of wind, solar and biofuels. Exxon executive Andrew Swiger stripped off the rhetoric regarding alternative energy sources at a recent conference while giving a sneak peak of the “Energy Outlook.”
In his comments he reported biofuels are expected to grow at a rate of 9.6 percent from 2005 through 2030. Up from 9.3 percent a year ago, and this at a time when overall energy demand is as flat as breakfast at IHOP. While wind and solar also grow, oil and coal are on the decline.
The next time a naysayer tells you ethanol is dead or alternative energy supporters are crack pots, remind them of these other words of wisdom from Mr. Twain: “A person with a new idea is a crank until the idea succeeds.”
I want to see Oprah wax poetic about the nobility of science and the implications of the full exposure of the corn genome. Instead of Martha Stewart prattling on about the merits of a vegetarian Thanksgiving, and what is wrong with the family farms producing our food, I am waiting for a provocative look at what this understanding of our largest crop means for mankind.
The announcement today that a team of scientists led by The Genome Center at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis has completed the corn genome is nothing short of monumental. But in this man bites dog world we live in the story will likely miss the evening news and the front page of your local paper.
While the glass half full crowd runs about blathering about how we can’t grow enough corn for all uses we are already doing it and the record crops grown in recent years is just a hint of things to come. (Anybody have any more clichés I can stick in this blog?)
The corn genome is a hodgepodge of some 32,000 genes crammed into just 10 chromosomes. In comparison, humans have 20,000 genes dispersed among 23 chromosomes. That officially makes a corn plant more complex than some people I know, but I digress.
This $29.5 million maize sequencing project utilized the collective expertise of 150 scientists and resulted in a road map scientists will explore for many more years to come. In these waning days of petroleum predominance this is welcome news.
Virtually anything made from oil can be made from corn today. Understanding the intricacies of the genome will allow us to make these emerging corn based products more efficiently and economically. Oh, and there is also that feeding the whole world thing. That’s a good idea too.
Apparently, last week’s International Energy Agency (IEA) numbers regarding future oil supplies were fudged to protect the innocent or at least our frail economic recovery. According to a whistleblower who whispered in the ear of The Guardian, the world is much closer to running out of oil that we think.
So, what is to be gained or lost by such skullduggery? Stockbrokers, bankers and oil investors jumping out of windows…sure, but what is the downside? (Insert sarcasm here).
The comments in the UK’s respected Guardian stated that the IEA has inflated its 2009 report of oil reserves for fear that the truth would shock world markets into a reactionary panic. IEA is alleged to have put its role as an industry watchdog in the kennel for the time being to fend off a potential buying panic…even at the risk of being exposed for overplaying supplies and chances for finding increased reserves.
On face value this might seem to be based on at least a modicum of twisted logic, but what are the ramifications for world governments who govern, plan and even invest based on IEA’s data? Consider that they also develop their own energy policies based on such essential information.
According to the Guardian’s high-level IEA source, estimates of global oil production growing from its current level of 83 million barrels per day to 105 million barrels per day are as bogus as the Tooth Fairy. The source said many IEA officials believe even 90 million barrels per day is unreachable, but the agency will not lower its forecast because it fears panic could spread through financial markets.
If we have indeed entered the “Peak Oil Zone” (that strange and unfamiliar place where we actually feel the pressure to get real about “energy policy” not oil policy) then it is time to fess up like an alcoholic at an AA meeting. “Hi my name is Joe Consumer and I have a petroleum problem.” (more…)