Natural Inspiration and Technology

We have been covered up with Horseflies this summer.  This photo is of one that was sitting on a gate latch a couple of days ago.  He sat there and let me take a number of pictures -- almost as if he was posing for me.  This is a Tabanus sulcifrons.  They are common in the eastern half of the U.S.  In actual size it was about 1 1/4" long.

I had never really looked at the detail on a Horsefly until I took this photograph.  The eyes, especially, are intriguing.  It looks like it's wearing expensive Sun shades.  It was either too full and fat to fly, or just "cool" enough to think it was invincible when I was taking the pictures.  I let it live because it was such a good subject.  Normally, that wouldn't be the case.  They literally torture the cattle with their bites which are a prime vector for disease.

Entomology was never a subject that held much interest for me.  After looking closely at this photo, though, I begin to see how it might be intriguing to some.  I wonder what the purpose of the feathery features on the front part of the body might be?  I also see what look to be horizontal flaps lying against the body, beneath the wing; what do they do?  Are they a vestigial wing?  Or, perhaps they are used to make a noise?  Maybe they are a shield that protects some vital organ?  What is the purpose of the tiny needle-like projection on the knee?

This critter stimulates my curiosity.  It also stimulates my imagination.  It doesn't look particularly aerodynamic, yet it is able to fly.  Man has developed many types of aircraft, but we don't have anything that flies or, even looks vaguely like this type of insect.  In science fiction we often see craft that fly much more like insects or, birds.  They have the ability to zip quickly across the landscape and then to drop rapidly to the surface in a "pouncing" move that appears to hover just over a target which might be an enemy that is captured by a grappling device -- much like the legs of the insect would grab prey.  Man hasn't quite mastered the air to that level.  Insects -- even ungainly appearing ones -- do it with ease.  So do birds.

I wonder if there is a way to utilize disease vectors such as the Horsefly to deliver vaccines rather than infectious agents?  When it is time to vaccinate the herd, just turn loose a handful of vaccine-laden insects that are genetically programmed to target cattle and which are unable to reproduce and have a short life.  Maybe we could do that with micro-drones?  Just think how little stress that would cause the animals.  Of course, you might lose a few drones to a swatting tail.

I wonder what other information could be gathered by such micro-drones?  Horseflies bite the animal; perhaps the drones could take blood samples and provide information about nutrition, health, gestation, etc.  I keep mentioning micro-drones because it is my understanding that a number have been developed that are designed to mimic insects.  One of the biggest issues is battery life.

If you happen to be a young, aspiring engineer, I would think a career focused on energy storage and transport would hold a bright future.  With macro projects such as the efforts to travel to Mars, or with the miniaturization of technology such as smart watches and phones, there is great need to be able to store and transport energy efficiently.

I've strayed from the Horsefly.  I suppose my point is that there is much we can learn from nature.  We need to be good stewards of it or, that tremendous reservoir of creative solutions will be lost.  Think about that.  Nature has already solved many of the challenges we face in technology.  Is our approach the correct one?

Greed, Envy and Energy

Greed has a way of capturing and consuming those who succumb to its allure.  We have a lot of common garden spiders on our place.  Their signature webs with the "stitching" through the middle connect many of the trees along the edge of the woods to the grass of the pasture beside it.  They take advantage of what is called "edge" which is the point where one type of habitat abuts against another -- such as forest and meadow.  The spider whose web is shown above seems to have hit the jackpot with a double catch.  It appears a cicada blundered into the net and a Great Black Digger Wasp became entangled as it attacked what was likely a struggling cicada.

The cicada likely became captive out of blind bad luck, but the wasp saw an easy catch and went for it, only to become a victim as well.  It died from greed or, perhaps it was envy?  You can't really attribute human feelings to insects, but for purposes of analogy it might work.  Let's go with envy; the wasp saw what the spider had and decided to take it.

The whole scenario made me think of a verse in Proverbs:

"A heart at peace gives life to the body, but envy rots the bones." -- Proverbs 14:30

In the case of the wasp, it is quite literally rotting as it hangs suspended in the web.  It will be a slow decomposition because all of the nutrition-laden juices have already been sucked out by the spider.  It is really just a shell that once held a vital life that plays an important role in the ecosystem.  Okay, I admit, part of its role is to be food for something else in the ecosystem.  The trouble with that particular aspect of its life-journey is that it terminates any other part of its existence.  Well, maybe not.  I suppose you have to consider that the physical matter will decompose and be recycled, but the vital energy of its life has now been expended.

I seem to be rambling a bit this morning, but it is somewhat intentional.  Let's head back to that verse quoted above.  "A heart at peace gives life..."  That's the part that is so very difficult for most of us.  We are never satisfied -- at peace with ourselves.  That lack of satisfaction drains energy from us.

I'm not saying we shouldn't be continually seeking to improve; I'm saying that each and every moment we should accept who we are and find the value in our daily progress toward becoming what we are meant to be.  Again, it is about being at peace with yourself, not about becoming stagnant.  This life is all about "becoming."  Hmmm....how do I explain what I mean?  Life is about becoming the best we can be.  We should be pouring energy into the system -- helping each other be better, to grow.  It's not about "taking," it's about giving.  It's about lifting others up and helping them to become greater than they believe is possible.

Enough of philosophy this morning.  Come to think of it, maybe the wasp was just trying to help the cicada get free of the web...nah.

Climate Change Quarterbacks

Some folks are observers

As they pass through this old life;

They prefer the grandstand

With a perch high above

The nitty-gritty going on the field.

Often, they carry on

A running commentary --

A critical analysis of everything they see

But, in which have never participated

As if they were experts

In the field.

They see the execution

Of well-coordinated movement

Which sometimes doesn't

Work as planned

Because there is opposition

Equally bent on succeeding.

Those spectators

See only a small part

Because they had no involvement

In the preparation,

The investment,

The time spent

Honing skills

And developing plans.

They have no

Sweat and blood and tears

Poured into the ground of battle

Yet, they rage on

With blame

When the results on the field

Don't match

The expectations

Of these sideline quarterbacks.

So it is with the beef industry

Which daily fights the battle

Against the elements

To bring food to the table

Of hungry people

Who criticize them

For what they do

More efficiently

And sustainably

Than could have been imagined

By generations

Who have come before

And paved the way.

Climate change?

Look to your steel

And concrete

And luxurious living

As you jet around the world

Burning fossil fuel.

Stirrup Deep in Grass

Sometimes I just need some wide open spaces.  This photo was taken a few years back while traveling through a portion of the Canadian River country in the Texas Panhandle.  If you click on the picture to enlarge it, you will see cattle scattered in the distance.

It was early Spring, yet you see a good amount of dried grasses among the greening countryside.  This ranch seems to be well managed and supports a large amount of wildlife along with the cattle.  I often see Pronghorn and Mule Deer when I pass through. 

It is an area once covered with American Bison and was a part of what was formerly the Comancheria -- home to the Comanche Indians.  It is one of the last parts of our country that was "domesticated" by settlers.  It was also a haunt of outlaws that raided the north-bound cattle drives during the late 1800's when The Trail shifted west to the eastern edge of the Panhandle.

Although you don't see it in the photo, this is a high-producing area for oil and gas.  In spite of what appears to be land with "nothing" in it, it helps feed the country, fuel the country, provides a home for wildlife and is visually pleasing to this old eye.  I don't think you can get much more sustainable than this.

In my mind I am horseback with my feet just clearing the grass and trailing west....

Wind, Cattle and Politics

This is one of my favorite photographs of all time.  I have used it before, although it has been a few years.  It was taken near Vega, Texas, at a wind farm.

I suppose it is a favorite because it shows energy and beef side-by-side on the Texas Plains not far from where I was raised.  Texas has long been known for both, although normally it is oil and gas that comes to mind.  These generators sit on the edge of the Canadian River breaks.  If you could look across the river to the north you would see plenty of the oil and gas production.

It is also a favorite because it shows the two enterprises as being complementary.  The land is being used in a sustainable way for cattle grazing on native pasture while the ever-present wind generates electricity that is sent through the power grid to cities far down state.  The last I checked, Texas still leads the nation in wind-generated power.

Those generators are becoming a problem though.  As time passes, that problem will become even bigger.  What do you do with one when it is broken and no longer can be fixed?  There are quite a few beginning to accumulate around the world.  The proponents of wind energy don't acknowledge the problems with it because it isn't in their backyard -- it's in "flyover" country. 

Food production, energy production, mining/extracting of minerals -- all, for the most part, are in "flyover" country.  The people driving for changes in how these things are done are located on the coasts in their elite enclaves of energy-sucking mansions, dining at high-end restaurants and flying around the world in their private jets.  They dictate policy through their manipulation of the political machinery (which includes the press) but don't have to live with the consequences.  They just enjoy the fruits.

There is always room for improvement, but out here in the country we get a lot of things right.  The wind generators in the photo wouldn't exist without large subsidies extracted from the taxpayers of this nation and passed on to already wealthy individuals who invest in the wind-capturing technology.  What we got right is that it didn't really disrupt the production of protein too much as evidenced by the cattle grazing beneath the generators and it brought a portion of those tax dollars out into the countryside in the form of jobs.

I really didn't intend to bring the political aspects into this brief commentary this morning, but it is a fact of life that the "fat cats" in Washington tend to find ways to make life difficult for the rest of us.  It's all about power and money -- it doesn't matter which political party, they're all essentially the same.

The Green Gambit

Gambit: a device, action, or opening remark, typically one entailing a degree of risk, that is calculated to gain an advantage. (Google Dictionary)

An example of a gambit is "The Green New Deal."

Many of the concepts expressed in the document have been around for a lot of years.  I enjoy reading science fiction and in that genre there are generally four basic scenarios for the future of earth.  1)  It becomes one massive, all-encompassing city and we exploit outer space to support it.  2)  Through war, or other global catastrophe, we devolve to a more primitive age of small tribal enclaves surviving against an extremely harsh environment and fighting each other for the limited resources.  3) There is some scientific breakthrough in the realm of energy research that provides unlimited power without dependence on fossil fuels.  4)  Some form of power such as nuclear energy is utilized to power the cities while the agricultural sector is dependent on horses, oxen and people for food production.

All of the scenarios focus on energy/fuel/power -- whatever you want to call it.  Utilization of energy drives our economy.

Fossil fuels such as coal and oil (or, its derivatives) is problematic.  Burning it (which is the only way the energy is released) frees carbon that has been sequestered into the earth, to circulate back into the carbon cycle.  Too much carbon, or other particulate matter, pollutes the atmosphere in a manner that causes a slow and general rise of temperatures.  It is basic science.

This heating occurs in natural cycles which can be detected through examination of the geologic record through time.  Part of it is connected to solar activity and part to volcanic activity on the earth.  It also has been theorized that a meteoric impact could cause a sudden escalation of the effect and may have contributed to the demise of various life forms such as dinosaurs at some time in the distant past.

The science and logic behind an effort to curb or, virtually eliminate the release of sequestered carbon is sound.  Many of the predictive models, however, are just that, predictive.  Predictions, by their nature, are often inaccurate.  They are "educated" guesses.

In the case of "The Green New Deal" we are seeing an exploitation of a developing global mindset that is properly motivated to reduce dependence on the release of sequestered carbon to fuel our economy.  It is much like profiteers who exploit any global event of a catastrophic nature.  In this case, it is a move toward communism (not socialism which is a pie-in-the-sky concept that has never been achieved on a large-scale basis.)

Gambits are often designed to exploit ignorance.  In a business deal it is frequently the knowledge by one side of some piece of information that materially affects the outcome which is believed to be unknown by the other side.  It is a high-stakes bet based on perceived advantage that may, or may not, be real.  "The Green New Deal" is a high-stakes gambit designed to expand power.  The groundwork has been laid over the past 30 years.  We are just now seeing the opening moves of the "game."

Yes, we need to find alternative sources of energy.  It doesn't need to be wind turbines, or ethanol.  Nuclear is a much better bet.

We also need to be vigilant against those who would exploit ignorance in an effort to gain power.  "We the people" are being manipulated by those we have elected to serve.  They in turn are being manipulated by those who have power and wish to expand it.  We must become better informed of both the science and the political systems that seek to exploit us.  It is all about power and control of it.

The greatest appeal of "The Green New Deal" is to those who are most isolated from the beauty that is the natural state of this earth.  Those whose lives are surrounded by concrete, people and pavement -- i.e. live in the cities -- long for the opportunity to touch that natural beauty.  Those in the country still get to experience it on a daily basis -- if they are paying attention.  The appeal of "The Green New Deal" is to those in the cities.  It is also the environment most ripe for a reform of some kind that would improve their lives -- even for the most affluent.  "Socialism" appeals to those trapped in inner-city ghettos.  They also vote.  They are frequently ignorant.  They are angry at their circumstance yet feel powerless to escape.

We need to do something about it.  Instead, we complain about their ignorance, their violence and their perceived unwillingness to do something about their circumstance.  When you have no hope, it is nearly impossible to change without help.  The promise of socialism is a life preserver floating just out of their reach, but visible.  We must provide an alternative.

Food and Energy for Texas

The whirling blades turn

Restlessly

The cattle graze

Quietly

The horizon stretches

Endlessly

Energy Flows

Food Grows

Texas:

#1 Installed Wind Energy Capacity

#1 Beef Production

We Can Do Better

We frequently see the debate between “environmentalists” and the rest of us as framed in an “us” vs. “them” manner. Business people feel that the environmental movement is nothing but a roadblock to progress. People in developing countries see environmental groups preventing them from experiencing the luxuries of the west because they hinder the utilization of the natural resources at hand.

Environmental groups often carry names like “Friends of the Earth” or “Save the Wildlife.” Those types of names carry with them a stigma that immediately sets on edge the typical businessman.

What if the debate became a completely economic one?

There is within the economic community the idea that when external costs are internalized into the price of a good or service, the decision to allocate resources to that good or service often changes. An example of internalizing these externalities would be the impact of a uranium mine on the Navajo Reservation. In order to avoid the potential complexities of the decision, let’s limit it to one possible issue – or, external cost -- the impact of the mining activity on the water supply of a community.

Suppose that the mine is located within the watershed of a Navajo community. To fully understand the cost to develop the mine, the potential pollution of the community’s water supply must be examined. Such examination would need to include preventative measures and possible remediation in the event of contamination. It also would need to look at long-term effects to wildlife residing in the watershed. Wildlife might provide hunting lease income to the reservation. It might also be of significant cultural value that would be difficult to price. It might affect tourist income from photography or viewing. It might impact local artisans who utilize specific clays located within the watershed.

With the exception of preventing and remediating potential contamination, none of the impacts mentioned are direct costs to the mine owner/operator. They are however, external costs to the community of locating the mine in their watershed.

How does one determine the value of natural resources? We can estimate the value of mineral deposits. We can value land based on the transactional market for similar properties. But, how do we value the less obvious things such as: filtering the water supply, tourism, hunting and fishing, recreation, moderating effects on climate, flood protection, erosion control and other items about which we don’t currently understand?

Hopefully in the near future, we will see attention paid to such values. Such things must be part of an overall land use plan before disruptive activities are begun. We need oil, natural gas, wind energy, solar energy, coal and we need minerals that can only be obtained through extractive activities. Surely we have learned enough of the complex interactions of the environment to begin to make sound evaluations of our activities in a broader sense. We must learn to utilize our resources without destroying our surroundings. Let’s drill – but let’s do so in an environmentally informed manner. Let’s build windmills for electrical generation – but let’s situate them in a manner that retains the benefits of our wild lands. Let’s learn from the unintended consequences of our past mistakes – such as ruined lakes and streams from coal mining or oil and gas extraction. We can do better.

Energy Independence Days

U.S. Senator John Cornyn has declared war on our dependence on foreign oil. He has created a special emphasis on his website called “Energy Independence Days” in which there will be a series of posts including videos from Senator Cornyn on the subject of how we might achieve our Energy Independence.

I am thankful that the Senator has taken the best interests of the American people to heart and created this opportunity for the people of this state and nation to have input, as he helps through his leadership, to set our lawmakers on course to address this critical issue. I pray that solutions can be developed through the private and public initiatives that are a hallmark of this great nation. I am humbled to have the opportunity to provide a guest post to the Senator’s website. Thank you Senator Cornyn for all that you do for our state and our country.

U.S. Senator Cornyn on Ethanol

U.S. Senator John Cornyn has graciously provided the guest posting below.

Hello Panhandle Poet readers…it’s a privilege to guest post here.

I wanted to touch base with you regarding an issue which is very pressing in the Panhandle, ethanol.

When first introduced to the marketplace, it was hoped that ethanol would help revitalize rural America, lower the price we pay at the pump and reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

That’s a worthy goal, yet the government’s focus on ethanol has produced a problem. There have been unintended adverse consequences to our economy from the focus on ethanol production. Chiefly, since February of 2006 the combined price of corn, wheat and soybeans has increased more than 416 percent.

For this reason and many more, I co-sponsored legislation which was introduced recently to freeze the renewable fuel standard corn-based ethanol mandate at current 2008 levels.
In the panhandle, like other places, the effect of ethanol production has been mixed. While a few have benefitted from it, a great many others have suffered.

As more and more farmers grow corn for ethanol production, cattle feeding ration prices have shot sky high. Mandates, along with the high cost of fuel, are squeezing every bit of profit out of cattle feedlots today.

As consumers continue to see rising food and fuel prices, freezing the corn-based ethanol mandate will allow us to re-evaluate the consequences of using food for fuel and determine the best way forward. Texas will remain a leader as we work to diversify our nation’s energy supply to include alternative and renewable sources, but in the meantime Congress must exercise its oversight role to ensure there are no further unintended consequences. A freeze of the mandate will allow time for necessary assessments and reduce increasing grocery, grain and feed prices.

Last year, the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) provided the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) the authority to waive the mandates, or adjust them as necessary to provide relief for consumers.

Last month, I joined Sen. Hutchison and others in sending a letter to EPA Administrator requesting an update on the pending rule-making process for the waiver of all or portions of the ethanol mandate passed by Congress in 2007. The letter also urged the EPA to consider the sharp rise in food prices as they review the mandate.

Freezing the mandate at its current level for one year is not a long term solution, but it is a good start towards finding one.

My heartfelt thanks go to the Senator for addressing this issue and for providing this post.

Also posted on:

Panhandle's Perspective
Common Sense Agriculture, Conservation and Energy

Senator Cornyn Visits With Bloggers

Yesterday I had the privilege of participating in a conference call with U.S. Senator John Cornyn (R-TX). It was an invitation only call issued to members of his blog roll.

I appreciate the Senator’s interest in keeping the members of his constituency informed through the new medium of bloggers. He closed his call by thanking bloggers for their role in sharing the news of what is happening in the world without the slanted agenda that is often behind the reporting of main-stream media.

The Senator opened the call with remarks about the Supplemental Troop Funding bill which passed the Senate by a 75-25 vote yesterday. He expressed his disappointment that the bill was saddled with an excessive number of non-defense related items that were added by members whose special interests overrode their concern for our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. They saw the sure passage of the measure as an easy means of adding pork-barrel items with little threat of veto due to the imminent need for the funding.

Also included on the bill was a modernization of the GI Bill-of-rights. He indicated that he believed such modernization was necessary and proper yet did not seem to be fully pleased with some of the provisions in the bill.

The Senator also remarked about the rising cost of gasoline and the impact that it was having on our lifestyles and our economy. It seems that the agenda of many of the Democrats in positions of power is overriding the common sense of developing our own resources in a sensible manner. While recognizing the need for conservation, we must develop domestic oil supplies from proven reserves as well as encourage the construction of additional domestic refining capacity. These items would help alleviate prices through a focus on the supply side of the equation. It will be necessary to expand our domestic supply to help offset the growing international demand from countries such as China whose economy is requiring energy at an increasing rate.

After his opening remarks, the Senator opened the call to questions from participants. The questions ranged from the vote to override the President’s veto of the Farm Bill (voted yes to override), to additional questions about energy (including the impact of the ethanol mandates) and gun-control.

On the question of ethanol, the Senator noted that the mandates were a perfect example of unintended consequences. He especially noted the negative impact to water and land demands and their impact on food prices through competing away acreage from the production of other crops. He also noted the negative impact to livestock and poultry producers through the escalating price of feed. He, along with several other Senators, has requested the EPA to adjust the mandates according to the provision in the original enabling legislation that allows them to do so.

He also noted that the ethanol mandates have caused many to behave illogically. He specifically cited a story released through Bloomberg on Wednesday, about the Postal Service driving ethanol powered vehicles that were 28% less efficient that similar gasoline powered vehicles. They were burning more fuel to travel the same distance.

I appreciate the Senator’s willingness to take the time to visit with the blogging community. I look forward to the next opportunity. If you are interested in joining the Senator Cornyn blogging community, contact Vincent@johncornyn.com.

Also posted on Common Sense Agriculture, Conservation and Energy.

New Competition for Beef

While traveling in Kansas this past week I had the opportunity to meet with several cattlemen and feedlot managers. The mood among them is somber to say the least. The market doesn’t seem to be adjusting to the realities of the new energy economy very quickly.

Transportation cost is one of the biggest factors impacting every industry across the country -- especially livestock feeding. When trucking companies are dealing with diesel prices in the neighborhood of $4.00/gallon, the cost of moving grain or animals or boxed beef becomes significant. If calves are being shipped from the Southeast to feedlots in the Plains, the cost of transportation must be figured into the price of those calves. The same issue affects corn – if it can be purchased at all.

On the other end of the supply chain we have the consumer. When gasoline prices are at record levels, groceries is one area where household costs are cut. We should be looking at ways to drive less or improve fuel efficiency but instead, we cut back on spending for higher priced food items such as beef. We don’t give up our gas guzzling habits very easily.

The result is that packing plants are looking at cold storage filled with boxes of unsold beef; the feedlots are looking at cattle that need to go to market but the packing plants aren’t willing to give them a price at which the feeder can make any money; cattle feeders are unwilling to buy calves to put on feed – and on and on. It all is driven by fuel in one form or another.

What is driving the fuel prices? I am amazed that our Congressional leaders in all of their wisdom feel compelled to bring the heads of multiple oil companies to Washington to berate them over the cost of fuel. Of course, most of the Congressmen and Senators don’t have much training in economics. In fact, I think they must be trained in anti-economics – or at least anti-free enterprise. Most of the laws coming out of Washington seem to hinder business rather than help. The cost of every regulation and every hair-brained pork-barrel scheme gets passed on to the consumer in some form or fashion. Sometimes it is a direct tax but more often than not, it as an indirect tax created through regulatory action on business.

It is the growing economies in India and China, domestic regulations concerning fuel additives, mandatory targets for bio-fuels, market uncertainty due to political unrest, burdensome regulation on building new refineries and infrastructure, the high cost of building refineries, environmental regulations, closure of certain areas to oil exploration, the devaluation of the dollar, and all of the other global factors that impact the energy business that are driving fuel prices. Why do we think we can solve the problem by making ethanol from corn? Oh, and did I mention the booming economies of India and China? A few hundred million individuals with the most disposable income at their finger tips that has been seen in those countries ever – want to spend it on some of the finer things in life – like automobiles and meat.

Our consumer spending habits are enabling those countries to build thriving economies that produce goods that must be transported to the U.S. by ships burning diesel. I’m happy their economies are growing. We just have to realize that we are paying for that growth.

The current ethanol mandates drive up the price of corn. That’s really all they do for our energy situation. Has the price of gasoline come down? The high price of corn was good for corn farmers – last year. The cost of farm inputs has now normalized (adjusted) due to the higher fuel costs and the margins for farmers will be much slimmer this year. Their business is extremely fuel intensive. Their input costs – such as for fertilizer and diesel – have gone through the roof.

The mandates are hurting cattle producers. They are suppressing demand for beef because now – put this in your pipe and smoke it – beef is competing against energy. The consumer dollar will choose energy over beef because of the need to heat and cool our homes and drive to and from work. In the past, beef competed with pork and poultry. Now it must also compete with energy because the primary cattle feed ingredient is being converted to fuel.

Isn’t it great what misguided regulations do for you?

Ethanol's Tangled Web

The article below is one that I recently had published in our local paper. I have posted it on my Common Sense Agriculture, Conservation and Energy blog but not here. Several readers have mentioned to me that they are interested in ethanol and so I am re-posting the article here.

Direct subsidies by the U.S. government to gasoline blenders are $0.51/gallon of ethanol. In 2006, the total of these subsidies was $2.5 billion. Such subsidies are the reason behind the ethanol boom that we are experiencing. In 2006, ethanol production earned our country an approximately 1.5% oil independence. According to the USDA, at the maximum practical production level which is likely to be achieved by 2017, corn ethanol would provide 3.7% oil independence.

Ethanol has been around since the first “moonshiner” discovered how to distill corn into whiskey. It is the same thing as 200 proof whiskey. It was used by Henry Ford to power some of the first Model T’s. Today it is fueling a euphoric corn market that has seen prices soar above $3.50/bushel. It has also sent turmoil through the livestock markets as feeders adjust to the realities of higher commodity prices.

The USDA estimates that ethanol yields about 25% more energy than is required to produce it. Most of the energy gain is in the form of co-products available for feed. If you measure the energy equivalence of the ethanol itself, it takes about as much energy to produce it as it yields. One gallon of ethanol contains about 2/3 of the energy of a gallon of gasoline. This means that if your vehicle achieved 30 mpg with gasoline, it would achieve only 20 mpg burning pure ethanol.

Ethanol co-products make excellent cattle feed for inclusion in feedlot rations. Some studies indicate that Wet Distiller’s Grains contain 100-112% of the value of dry rolled corn. Dry Distiller’s Grains however are only about 88% of the feed value of dry rolled corn. In the larger feedlots that primarily utilize steam-flaked corn, the comparative feed value is much lower. That is why the cost of the co-products will be one of the primary determining factors driving its use as a substitution for feeding corn in livestock rations.

One of the most controversial issues surrounding the production of ethanol from corn revolves around concerns over the impact to food prices. Most of the corn produced in the United States is utilized as animal feed. Rising corn prices have already had a significant impact on the cost of feeding livestock.

Most planting decisions are at least somewhat based on relative commodity prices of various crops that are feasible for planting in a particular area. In areas where corn is a viable alternative, significant crop acreage is being shifted to corn production at the expense of other crops. The effect is to lift commodity prices for all crops that are being replaced by corn production. Again, the primary impact will be on crops that are destined for animal feed, such as soybeans and other grains.

As ethanol production capacity increases, the pressure on substituting ethanol fuel crops for other commodities will increase. The result will certainly be upward pressure on the prices of food crops due to the scarcity impact on supply and demand.

Should we be concerned? The U.S. consumer pays a smaller percentage of his income for food (less than 10%) than consumers in any other part of the world (20 – 50% for middle income countries). In countries that struggle at a subsistence level of farming, there will be pressure to divert land utilization for ethanol fuel production. The impact on such economies will depend on government policies related to land ownership and control of production. In some instances, it could help to lift economies above subsistence level by creating the opportunity for higher revenue crops.

Ethanol is only a tiny piece of the energy puzzle. It is a tiny piece that is creating turmoil across the globe in the agricultural sector. Turmoil generally creates opportunities for some and failure for those who do not adapt to changes in the marketplace. It is hoped that new technologies for producing ethanol from plant fibers rather than highly concentrated energy sources such as corn will transform ethanol production in the near future. In the meantime, we can expect commodity prices to remain high which will hopefully be a boon to our rural economy.

Related articles:

http://agriconenergy.blogspot.com/2007/09/sweet-sorghum-ethanol.html

http://agriconenergy.blogspot.com/2007/09/energy-vs-food-ii.html

http://agriconenergy.blogspot.com/2007/09/grants-for-biomass-energy-research.html

http://agriconenergy.blogspot.com/2007/09/bio-fuels-research-will-have-many.html

http://agriconenergy.blogspot.com/2007/09/advanced-biofuels-research.html

http://agriconenergy.blogspot.com/2007/09/georgia-tech-biofuels-research.html

http://agriconenergy.blogspot.com/2007/10/microbes-for-hydrogen-production.html

http://agriconenergy.blogspot.com/2007/11/food-vs-fuel-debate-another-round.html

http://agriconenergy.blogspot.com/2007/11/ethanol-environmental-manual.html

A New Blog

I have undertaken a new blog. You will find it at Common Sense Agriculture, Conservation and Energy. Come on over and check it out.

Capture the Wind

There's another Wind Farm coming to the Panhandle...

Huge wind farm in works

World's largest facility be built in Briscoe County

By Kevin Welchmailto:Welchkevin.welch@amarillo.com

Two big players raised the stakes in the wind power game Friday.

Shell WindEnergy and Luminant, a subsidiary of TXU, announced an agreement to build 3,000 megawatts of wind generation in Briscoe County. The plan would top the world's largest wind farm near Abilene, which produces 735 megawatts.

A megawatt can power about 250 average homes.

The planners think the reception has been very positive.

"People love it in Briscoe County," said Jerry Leatherman, managing director of ACE Renewables, which has contracted with Shell to help develop the project. "It is typical of rural areas of the Panhandle where the water table has declined (reducing irrigation) and other things have drawn people away. It's been shrinking."

The impact could be substantial.

"You've got 900 square miles and 1,700 people," said Tim O'Leary, communications manager of Shell. "There will be an economic impact and demand on infrastructure. There will be an economic impact for decades."

Employment will increase, both for construction and during normal operations.
"It'll give a big bump during construction," said Mark Wilby, senior business development manager for Shell. "And after construction, on a project of 85 to 90 turbines, usually there are two to three full-time jobs and another four or five for maintenance. Conceivably this could be 1,500 turbines is one estimate."

The power from the project would significantly boost the wind energy Luminant's parent company, TXU, can deliver to customers. It currently buys 705 megawatts and has a contract to start buying another 209 megawatts.

"We're the largest purchaser of wind power in the state now," said Tom Kleckner, Luminant spokesman. "So actual ownership of generation is the next logical step."

The announcement came after a lot of action on the ground trying to catch the wind.
"It's been very interesting leasing rights," Leatherman said. "There has been a great deal of competition. I'd say eight different developers have been in here and left. It's been a challenge."
Nobody wanted to talk about project costs, number of acres leased or exact locations. However, the plan is to build the wind farm on top of the Caprock in the southeast sector of the county.
"It's not only on the rim or edge of the Cap, the wind is very good as you approach the rim for several miles," Leatherman said.

Everyone involved is waiting for the Texas Public Utilities Commission to issue a final order that will start the construction of transmission lines to get wind power to the metropolitan areas in the eastern part of the state, so time lines are not firm.

"PUC Chairman (Paul) Hudson has said he anticipates transmission could be completed by 2011/2012," Wilby said.

While other developers have proposed large projects - Boone Pickens touts a 4,000 megawatt project and Airtricity and partners propose a 2,235 megawatt project - the Shell/Luminant plan is different.

The twist is to use the turbines to also pump air into underground formations to compress it. The compressed air is then released to turn generators, producing power when the wind is not blowing or demand is too great for the wind to keep up with. The geologic situation below the surface looks promising.

"One of two formations have to be present - a salt dome or depleted aquifers, either gas or water," Wilby said. "The Panhandle is an ideal place for that."

_________________________________________

Everywhere that I drive I see wind generators -- either generating electricity or parts on a truck headed down the highway. This part of the world is fast becoming the Wind Power Generation Capitol of the World.

Energy vs. Food

This is a glimpse of the future...



China blocks food for biofuel

By George Reynolds



12/06/2007 - Chinese biofuel producers should only use non-food crops, the government said yesterday, following fears of shortages and further price rises that could occur as demand for greener energy increases.Biofuels are seen as a potential alternative to fossil fuels, because they can be manufactured from sustainable crops including corn, wheat, sugar, cassava, sweet sorghum, and oilseeds.The moratorium will ease manufacturing concerns about competing for ingredients being used to make ethanol and biodiesel. Corn is currently accounts for 90 per cent of the inputs in Chinese ethanol manufacture, and has sharply risen in price over the past few years due to subsidies and high crude oil prices.Moreover, last year's 43 per cent rise in the price of pork, China's principal meat, due to increasing feed costs, has pushed officials to act."Food-based ethanol fuel will not be the direction for China," said Xu Dingming, an official of the National Energy Leading Group, at a energy seminar held this week, according to the Xinhua News Agency.Biofuel manufacturers will now need to source non-food crops, such as cassava and sweet sorghum used ....(follow the link for complete article)



______________________________________



Ethanol and biodiesel will have a dramatic impact on food prices in this country over the next few years. I have posted some of my thoughts on this in the past. Fuel independence may create food dependence if we continue to focus those efforts on biofuels. Are we as a country willing to become dependent on South America for our grains? That may not be an issue if Brazil continues with its efforts to produce ethanol. We are heading for a global food crisis. U.S. citizens will pay a higher percentage of their disposable income for food than ever in the history of this country. What will the impact be on countries that suffer from chronic food shortages today?

There have been numerous issues to criticize the current administration and Congress over. I think the subsidies to encourage biofuels may be the biggest one. The money spent subsidizing ethanol would be better spent on nuclear, wind, or solar power generation. Biofuel money should be restricted to garbage and human waste. Subsidizing the use of crops for biofuels is an error in judgment that will have huge impact on our food supplies in a very short time. That impact is in fact already occurring although there is a significant lag before it will be felt in the consumer marketplace. The sad thing is, it will not lower gasoline prices and may contribute to their rise due to legislating blends both at the Federal and State levels. This, at the same time that it is raising food prices.

The first impact that will be felt is in the cost of proteins. This includes all meats and beans. The impact to grain-based foods will be more slowly realized. This seems backward at first glance. However, due to the small impact of "in-the-field" prices for grains on the cost of a finished loaf of bread, the impact will be minimal in spite of significant grain price increases. However, the cost of feeding livestock has increased tremendously based on the speculative impact of corn conversion to ethanol. There has also been secondary impact on the price of feed fat which is a rendered energy source similar to lard that is a component of many animal feeds -- such as pet foods. This is because of the utilization of tallow for biodiesel production. Just get ready. The price of your hamburger is about to double. It will only take about 6 -9 months for the initial impact to begin to filter through the production cycle.

The potential impact of significantly higher food prices could quickly spread to the housing market. Families will have less disposable income. Foreclosures may become as common as they were in the 80's at the height of the S&L crisis. Prices will plummet. The housing bubble will burst. The impact will then ripple through the financial sectors potentially causing bank failures.

OK. I guess that's a bit of a gloom-and-doom view, but it is also realistic. Cheap and abundant food has been a significant component of the economic success of this country. Current alternative energy policies are threatening our future food supply. Congress and the President need to think again about how we achieve energy independence.

It's Going to Take One Big Mole!

This is interesting in light of my previous post this morning concerning China.

Russia Plans World's Longest Tunnel, a Link to Alaska (Update3)

By Yuriy Humber and Bradley Cook

April 18 (Bloomberg) -- Russia plans to build the world's longest tunnel, a transport and pipeline link under the Bering Strait to Alaska, as part of a $65 billion project to supply the U.S. with oil, natural gas and electricity from Siberia.
The project, which Russia is coordinating with the U.S. and Canada, would take 10 to 15 years to complete, Viktor Razbegin, deputy head of industrial research at the Russian Economy Ministry, told reporters in Moscow today. State organizations and private companies in partnership would build and control the route, known as TKM-World Link, he said.
A 6,000-kilometer (3,700-mile) transport corridor from Siberia into the U.S. will feed into the tunnel, which at 64 miles will be more than twice as long as the underwater section of the Channel Tunnel between the U.K. and France, according to the plan. The tunnel would run in three sections to link the two islands in the Bering Strait between Russia and the U.S.
``This will be a business project, not a political one,'' Maxim Bystrov, deputy head of Russia's agency for special economic zones, said at the media briefing. Russian officials will formally present the plan to the U.S. and Canadian governments next week, Razbegin said.
The Bering Strait tunnel will cost $10 billion to $12 billion and the rest of the investment will be spent on the entire transport corridor, the plan estimates.
``The project is a monster,'' Yevgeny Nadorshin, chief economist with Trust Investment Bank in Moscow, said in an interview. ``The Chinese are crying out for our commodities and willing to finance the transport links, and we're sending oil to Alaska. What, Alaska doesn't have oil?''
Finance Agencies
Tsar Nicholas II, Russia's last emperor, was the first Russian leader to approve a plan for a tunnel under ......

_________________________________________

Follow the link and read the entire article. A tunnel under the Bering Strait? I suppose it is better for us to beat the Chinese to the vast repository of raw materials in Siberia. I can't see them sitting still for it when they will desperately need these materials and the energy over the coming years. It is going to become a matter of priorities for them. Do they invade north into the "storehouse", or head west to the "powerhouse"? If they go north, they get both. Will this country be willing to go to war as an ally of Russia against China to prevent it? We'd better be becoming energy independent quickly!

The Slumbering Giant

China makes me nervous. The article below points out just one of the issues that bother me. This is one big sleeping giant that is waking up.


China's Rural Poor Will Be Most Hurt By Econ Downturns

WASHINGTON (AP)--China's currently booming economy over the last quarter century has brought wealth to hundreds of millions but left one out of five Chinese in extreme poverty, living on less than $1 a day, a joint Chinese-U.S. report released Tuesday said.

It is that 20% of China's 1.3 billion people who will be most affected by the economy's health in the next 15 years, said the study, titled China's Economic Prospects 2006-2020.

"Despite unprecedented progress in reducing the most severe poverty, about 70% of the population still survives on very low incomes, defined at the World Bank standard of $2 per day," the study said.

Most of those Chinese live in rural areas, where the opulence that grew from an average economic growth of 9% a year for the most part has bypassed, it said.

"With about 45% of the work force still engaged in low-productivity agriculture," it said, "the Chinese economy needs to create hundreds of millions of jobs in higher-productivity sectors to enable these workers to earn their way out of poverty."

China's accession to the World Trade Organization in 2001 generally benefited the economy, the report said, but again mainly for urban dwellers, not those of the countryside. It said accession increased employment by about 13 million jobs, or 1.4%. The government estimates 300 million were needed for full employment, which it said proves that "trade alone cannot solve the country's employment challenges."

The study came to its findings by considering three scenarios: current trends continue; world trade continues to grow, and China improves its resource allocation; and risks become more dangerous, with trade tensions increasing and government policy changes that reduces the quality of modernization in the economy.

- Continued current trends would maintain an annual growth rate of about 8% over the next five years. Based on 2002 constant prices, that would mean a $3.6 trillion gross domestic product in 2010, which still would be less than that of Japan in 2002. Per capita GDP would be about $2,670, comparable to current incomes of Brazil, South Africa and Turkey. Growth would slow slightly after 2010, and the GDP by 2020 would be $7.5 trillion and per capita GDP about $5,300, comparable to incomes in Poland and Hungary today.

- In the other two scenarios, the rural poor would be most damaged by the pessimistic scenario, the study said. As trade disputes and government policies had increasingly greater impact, fewer opportunities would exist for agricultural workers to find jobs in cities, and their earnings in the countryside would stagnate, it said. China would be importing fewer agricultural products, and agricultural production would decline in China and hit rural incomes.

"China's continued development will require a reasonably benign international environment if recent rates of growth are to be maintained," the study said. "However, policy choices by the Chinese government will determine whether living standards rise throughout the country, whether productivity increases to smoothly compensate for the aging of the population and whether the economy evolves in a balanced and sustainable manner.

The study's authors are Sandra Polaski, a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace; and Li Shantong, a senior research fellow, and He Jianwu, a researcher, at the Development Research Center of the State Council of China.

____________________________________________

"Free-market-like" initiatives within this communist country are fueling the majority of the growth in their economy. However, the government attitude to these initiatives is often capricious. China is searching for its path to the future and it walks a fine line between old and new thinking. Every country throughout history that has made this transition has gone through periods of extreme political unrest. A significant downturn in the Chinese economy could easily result in widespread rioting and potentially, civil war. It is certain the Chinese government is considering solutions in such an event that would include heightened military activity -- not just against their own people, but against neighboring countries as well. Such activity would provide employment for the population both directly through military service and through increased economic activity within their military/industrial complex. Thrown into this mix is the Chinese dependence on foreign energy sources. With the political unrest in the Middle East, I'm certain they are already considering, or have, contingency plans for intervention to insure their energy supplies are uninterrupted.

Some New Links Added

Since I find myself repeatedly writing about climate change, alternative energy sources, ethanol, the weather, etc. I've added a few Links in my Links list. There's some interesting reading there if you have time to wade through it all.