Author Archives:

Outta here but still around

Today is my last day at the Wichita Eagle.

What a strange sound that has.

After 18 years and a lot of topics, I’m leaving the Eagle to become editor of Kansas Farmer magazine, a Farm Progress publication.

I’ll still be in Wichita, working the state from a home office, and my new bosses tell me there will even be blogging in my future, so I won’t be going away, just changing location.

I want to say thanks to all those who have been faithful readers through the years and I hope to see you around at some of the state’s agricultural events _ including the Kansas State Fair just around the corner.

Keep the fences tight and the rows straight.

Food vs. Fuel: How about both?

A new alliance supporting credible science and funding for research in agriculture technology has been formed. Key players are Deere and Co., Dupont, Monsanto, Archer Daniels Midland and the Renewable Fuels Association.

The new alliance aims to advance the idea that agriculture is capable of supply the world with food, feed, fiber and fuel.

Is it oil speculators? You bet.

I regularly get E-mails of some of the best of commentary on issues that I follow regularly, which includes the price of oil and what’s causing today’s astronomical prices. The column I just read is so on point that I wanted to share. It’s written by John Hanchette, a professor at St. Bonaventure University who is also a Pulitzer Prize winning national correspondent, a founding editor of USA Today and a Gannett Top 10 reporter of the past 25 years.

Happy reading.

Ethanol foes miss details of pesky numbers

There was some astonishment among rural economy watchers when reports began hitting the presses that a respected USDA economist, Keith Collins, had conducted a study saying ethanol production had driven food prices up 30 percent.

Well, it turns out, that’s not quite what the study actually said.

Collins reported that ethanol production had been a factor in the increasing price of corn, which does have an impact on other food prices, especially poultry and pork. He put the ethanol impact at about 1.8 percent of a 4.3 percent rise in food prices.

Mike Woolverton, grain marketing economist with Kansas State University Research and Extension, said some mainstream media — including some with considerable influence in Congress — were just a tad math challenged when they converted those numbers into a 30 percent increase.

Collins’ numbers are actually pretty much in line with those reported by K-State for months. And Woolverton said future impacts on food prices are also being grossly overestimated.

Collins’ complete study is still available to read on the Farm Journal website.

 

Now THIS is exciting energy news

Altair Nanotechnologies, a Nevada company that makes high-powered battery systems, has completed validation testing of a two-megawatt, 500 kilowatt-hour battery system that holds real promise in the effort to find a way to store energy and feed it in reliable increments to the nation’s electrical grid.

The system, purchased by AES Corp., was tested at a substation owned by Indianapolis Power & Light.

Developers hail it as a big step toward commercial deployment of grid-scale energy storage systems.

If things stay on track, the system could help utilities move toward greater use of wind and solar power generation.  A summary of the validation report tells how they did it.

World Bank says Guardian got ethanol report wrong

Donald Mitchell, author of the much-hyped Guardian report blaming ethanol for 75 percent of the increase in the price of food, tells the Wall Street Journal that’s not exactly how it is.

Mitchell said the report was not top secret, was out in April and was one of a number of opinions in working papers that are undergoing peer review. It’s kind of “on the far edge” he said.

Ya think?

New report goes wild on ethanol-food debate

Wow! The British newspaper, The Guardian, published a claim over the holiday weekend that it has obtained a confidential copy of a World Bank study that blames ethanol for 75 percent of the increase in world food costs.

Of course, since the cited report is top secret with unnamed authors, there’s no methodology or mathematics to back up this claim, which is wildly out of balance with even the highest end of prior reports.

And the math should prove to be quite interesting, given what we know about the total percentage of food prices that are attributable to raw materials. Even if you buy into the woes of poor, poor Tyson paying through the nose for chicken feed, the balance sheet still shows only about 13 percent of the supermarket costs of poultry comes from the cost of feeding birds to harvest weight.

Interesting note: the paper claims the report dates back to April, but the “leak” came just in time for the summit of the top eight industrialized nations on the issue of biofuels and the food crisis.

Call me cynical, but that makes my phony report radar go “beep.”

Cooler than normal temps latest corn threat

We’ve been hearing a lot lately about the threat of warmer temperatures to human health and the national economy.

But the latest emerging threat to the already-endangered 2008 Midwest corn harvest is just the opposite. Cooler than normal temperatures are the problem, according to the latest data from AccuWeather.

Temperatures of the last week have been two to four degrees below normal. A continuation of that trend could push back the maturation date of the crop.

Ag experts use growing degree days, based on temperature, to measure corn growth. From June 17 to 23, the heart of the corn belt saw 14 percent fewer degree days than normal.

New studies, new blame on ethanol

Two new studies are out, both arguing that the current Renewable Fuels Standard is “devastating” the economy and driving food prices out of reach.

The studies by Thomas Elam of Farm Econ LLC and Keith Collins, former USDA economist, come at the end of the EPA comment period on a request by Texas Gov. Rick Perry to roll back the ethanol mandate.

Both studies are in direct conflict with last week’s USDA report which found that ethanol has reduced gasoline prices and had only minimal impact on food prices. And with the Consumer Federation of America, which found that how far it is transported is the biggest factor in food costs. And with Texas A&M University, which found that energy costs affect food prices on multiple levels.

Both Elam and Collins said just the opposite, that ethanol has been a key factor in raising food prices and had almost no impact on gasoline prices.

Elam was hired by the Balanced Food and Fuel Coalition, a consortium of livestock, pork and poultry producers, to come up with a study to support their views.

Collins was on the payroll of Kraft Foods Global to provide supporting material for its comment to the EPA urging the overturn of the fuel standard.

HMMM. I wonder how those organizations knew what those studies would say before they were conducted?

Earthjustice sues federal agency over Holcomb plant

You have to hand it to the Sierra Club. It — and its well-funded legal arm, Earthjustice — certainly know how to make political hay.

On Tuesday, they will be at it again in Washington when taxpayer dollars will go to court to defend the Rural Utility Service, which has been sued by Earthjustice for, gasp, fulfilling its legal responsibility.

In the past, you see, the Rural Utility Service, which was created by the government to provide funding for rural electric cooperatives to build power plants, has loaned money to Sunflower Rural Electric Cooperative to build power plants.

According to Earthjustice’s own account, ” UNDER THE LAW GOVERNING THE PROGRAM and RUS’s agreements with Sunflower, RUS must also approve any expansion of Sunflower’s plants and any new loans that Sunflower seeks from non-government sources.”

So Earthjustice sued RUS for failing to consider the environmental consequences of that action, namely CO2 emissions that might come from future expansions.

Never mind that the last Sunflower coal-fired construction was three decades ago, long before the steady drumbeat on the evils of carbon dioxide had grabbed national attention. Or that Sunflower hasn’t sought RUS funding for its proposed Holcomb expansion.

According to the suit, RUS should not have honored its legal responsibility or prior agreement and should have shot down the agreements between Sunflower and its third-party lenders. So, off we go to court.

No matter who wins this one, taxpayers lose. We get to pay for the argument.

Ethanol cuts gas prices, has little impact on food

The average American family has saved more than $500 at the gas pump in the last year because of the impact of ethanol on fuel prices, according to new research from Merrill Lynch.

Commodity strategist Francisco Blanch reported that retail gasoline prices would be $21 a barrel higher without ethanol, an average savings of $526 a year.

At the same time, ethanol has boosted corn prices just 21 percent since 2004, an increase that accounts for about $15 a year in food expense.

The real culprits in escalating food prices are rapidly increasing oil prices, increased global demand for meat and grains, commodity speculation, the declining value of the dollar, droughts and bad weather.

There are, however, some folks — some big oil companies among them — that really don’t want that message to reach the public; hence an ongoing public relations campaign to blame ethanol for all the woes in the grocery aisle.

It’s not so folks. Only a tiny portion of the food dollar pays for raw materials. The rest of your money pays for processing, packaging and transportation, all energy-intensive segments.

Mississippi bids for Animal Disease Lab

Mississippi has approved $88.3 million in bonds, hoping to attract the National  Bio and Agro Defense Facility that will replace the animal disease research lab at Plum Island, N.Y.

Kansas State University at Manhattan is also in the running for the Level 4 lab, which will research the deadliest of animal pathogens.  Kansas approved $105 million in bonding authority to provide infrastructure for the lab if Manhattan wins the bid.

Kansas Bioscience Authority president Tom Thornton said choosing the site is about a lot more than money and Kansas has a big advantage in the contest, which also includes Athens, Ga.;  Butner, N.C.; and San Antonio.

Thornton says Kansas’s experience in animal  health research, its ability to attract eminent scholars and the presence of world corporate headquarters of animal health industry leaders in the corridor from Columbia, Mo. to Manhattan should count for more than money.

That corridor is home to 126 animal health companies, representing 30 percent of the industry, including the corporate headquarters of four of the top 10 in the world. Missouri, Oklahoma, Nebraska and Colorado are all supporting the Kansas bid for the center.

Those factors certainly should give Kansas an edge, but politics is likely to play a big role in the final decision and in the end it may well be who has the most clout that determines who wins the center.

The decision is supposed to be made by the end of this year.