Merkel, Like Lula, Rejects Biofuels as Root of Food-Price Rises

By Jeremy van Loon

April 17 (Bloomberg) -- German Chancellor Angela Merkel said soaring prices
for rice, milk and other staple foods are not related to global demand for
biofuels, and can instead be ascribed to growing affluence in developing
countries.

On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 08:20:44 -0700, "Bob Eld" <nsmontassoc@yahoo.com
wrote:

Merkel, Like Lula, Rejects Biofuels as Root of Food-Price Rises

By Jeremy van Loon

April 17 (Bloomberg) -- German Chancellor Angela Merkel said soaring prices
for rice, milk and other staple foods are not related to global demand for
biofuels, and can instead be ascribed to growing affluence in developing
countries.



And why does it have to be either/or?

Surely, both are relevant.

But I bet that a careful check of the numbers would show that biofuel
usage is more closely related to recent food price increases.


Can we do better than quote politicians on this? On either side!

bob

On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 18:38:13 -0700, Bob <bbx107.XYZ@excite.XYZ.com
wrote:

On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 08:20:44 -0700, "Bob Eld" <nsmontassoc@yahoo.com
wrote:

Merkel, Like Lula, Rejects Biofuels as Root of Food-Price Rises

By Jeremy van Loon

April 17 (Bloomberg) -- German Chancellor Angela Merkel said soaring prices
for rice, milk and other staple foods are not related to global demand for
biofuels, and can instead be ascribed to growing affluence in developing
countries.


And why does it have to be either/or?

Surely, both are relevant.

But I bet that a careful check of the numbers would show that biofuel
usage is more closely related to recent food price increases.


Can we do better than quote politicians on this? On either side!

bob

According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel, Europe
produces equivalent to 90% of its consumption of fuel ethanol (2006).

I hypothesize that peak oil is what is really driving rice prices and
prices of other foods through the roof. In modern agriculture, as it
has become after the green revolution, lots of oil is used, not only
for running tractors and other machines, but also for making
fertilizers and pesticides. As the price of oil rises, it is becoming
difficult for third world farmers to buy the necessary oil based
products. They compete with rich nations that use the oil for lots of
industrial processes. When the industrialized nations bid for oil on
the market, the prize tends to get set higher than the poorer producer
can afford. The result may be that they buy less fertilizer than the
crops need, which leads to poorer harvests, which would rise the price
through lack of supply. Either that, or they do buy the fertilizer
they need, and then must transfer the cost to the buyers, which is
another mechanism for rising the price.

I'm not as sure about all this as I might sound; I haven't found any
hard data, but it might be worth investigating, perhaps. It's a shame
that I can't seem to find out how much oil is typically used to
produce a ton of rice or, for that matter, a ton of wheat or corn.

S.

Sevenhundred Elves wrote:
On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 18:38:13 -0700, Bob <bbx107.XYZ@excite.XYZ.com
wrote:

On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 08:20:44 -0700, "Bob Eld" <nsmontassoc@yahoo.com
wrote:

Merkel, Like Lula, Rejects Biofuels as Root of Food-Price Rises

By Jeremy van Loon

April 17 (Bloomberg) -- German Chancellor Angela Merkel said soaring prices
for rice, milk and other staple foods are not related to global demand for
biofuels, and can instead be ascribed to growing affluence in developing
countries.


And why does it have to be either/or?

Surely, both are relevant.

But I bet that a careful check of the numbers would show that biofuel
usage is more closely related to recent food price increases.


Can we do better than quote politicians on this? On either side!

bob

According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel, Europe
produces equivalent to 90% of its consumption of fuel ethanol (2006).

I hypothesize that peak oil is what is really driving rice prices and
prices of other foods through the roof. In modern agriculture, as it
has become after the green revolution, lots of oil is used, not only
for running tractors and other machines, but also for making
fertilizers and pesticides. As the price of oil rises, it is becoming
difficult for third world farmers to buy the necessary oil based
products. They compete with rich nations that use the oil for lots of
industrial processes. When the industrialized nations bid for oil on
the market, the prize tends to get set higher than the poorer producer
can afford. The result may be that they buy less fertilizer than the
crops need, which leads to poorer harvests, which would rise the price
through lack of supply. Either that, or they do buy the fertilizer
they need, and then must transfer the cost to the buyers, which is
another mechanism for rising the price.

I'm not as sure about all this as I might sound; I haven't found any
hard data, but it might be worth investigating, perhaps. It's a shame
that I can't seem to find out how much oil is typically used to
produce a ton of rice or, for that matter, a ton of wheat or corn.

S.

Something like this? http://tinyurl.com/56wabw

The USDA tracks all sorts of things. There might be more information
there. A couple links:
http://www.ers.usda.gov/
http://www.nass.usda.gov/
Some info and commentary: http://tinyurl.com/ysdwjq
Americans spend about 10% of our income on food. A farmer gets about
20% of that on average.

Dean

German Development Minister Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul said that
production of biofuels is 30 to 70% responsible for food cost
inflation.

http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/198490,german-minister-calls-for-biofuel-rethink-over-rising-food-prices.html

Bill Clinton said that "What's really hurting the food markets is
America moving into ethanol."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/04/07/nriots107.xml

Congressman Jim McGovern said Congress made a mistake in not
anticipating the impact biofuels have on food costs. "If there was a
secret vote, there is a pretty large number of people who would like
to reassess what we are doing.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/15/business/worldbusiness/15food.html?_r=1&em&ex=1208404800&en=c404a9e3b6e51920&ei=5087%0A&oref=slogin

The politicians who created this disaster do not want to admit they
were wrong.

For a great article that explains why biofuels are a disaster, and why
solar and wind are too "dilute" to help much, see "Food Riots Made in
the USA"

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/015/007jlljc.asp?pg=1

For biofuel facts and better alternatives, see
http://home.att.net/~meditation/bio-fuel-hoax.html

Christopher Calder

For a great article that explains why biofuels are a disaster, and why
solar and wind are too "dilute" to help much, see "Food Riots Made in
the USA"

On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 19:29:44 -0500, Dean Hoffman
""dh0496\"@ine$br#as&ka.com"> wrote:

Sevenhundred Elves wrote:
On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 18:38:13 -0700, Bob <bbx107.XYZ@excite.XYZ.com
wrote:

On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 08:20:44 -0700, "Bob Eld" <nsmontassoc@yahoo.com
wrote:

Merkel, Like Lula, Rejects Biofuels as Root of Food-Price Rises

By Jeremy van Loon

April 17 (Bloomberg) -- German Chancellor Angela Merkel said soaring prices
for rice, milk and other staple foods are not related to global demand for
biofuels, and can instead be ascribed to growing affluence in developing
countries.

And why does it have to be either/or?

Surely, both are relevant.

But I bet that a careful check of the numbers would show that biofuel
usage is more closely related to recent food price increases.


Can we do better than quote politicians on this? On either side!

bob
According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel, Europe
produces equivalent to 90% of its consumption of fuel ethanol (2006).

I hypothesize that peak oil is what is really driving rice prices and
prices of other foods through the roof. In modern agriculture, as it
has become after the green revolution, lots of oil is used, not only
for running tractors and other machines, but also for making
fertilizers and pesticides. As the price of oil rises, it is becoming
difficult for third world farmers to buy the necessary oil based
products. They compete with rich nations that use the oil for lots of
industrial processes. When the industrialized nations bid for oil on
the market, the prize tends to get set higher than the poorer producer
can afford. The result may be that they buy less fertilizer than the
crops need, which leads to poorer harvests, which would rise the price
through lack of supply. Either that, or they do buy the fertilizer
they need, and then must transfer the cost to the buyers, which is
another mechanism for rising the price.

I'm not as sure about all this as I might sound; I haven't found any
hard data, but it might be worth investigating, perhaps. It's a shame
that I can't seem to find out how much oil is typically used to
produce a ton of rice or, for that matter, a ton of wheat or corn.

S.
Something like this? http://tinyurl.com/56wabw

The USDA tracks all sorts of things. There might be more information
there. A couple links:
http://www.ers.usda.gov/
http://www.nass.usda.gov/
Some info and commentary: http://tinyurl.com/ysdwjq
Americans spend about 10% of our income on food. A farmer gets about
20% of that on average.

Dean

Thank you, Dean!
Those links are food for thought, I must say. Nothing on the amounts
of oil used to produce pesticides and synthetic fertilizers, though,
but at least it's a start. (Except I'll have to convert it all into
SI-units before I can begin to grok it.)

S.

Sevenhundred Elves wrote:
On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 19:29:44 -0500, Dean Hoffman
""dh0496\"@ine$br#as&ka.com"> wrote:
Sevenhundred Elves wrote:
According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel, Europe
produces equivalent to 90% of its consumption of fuel ethanol (2006).

I hypothesize that peak oil is what is really driving rice prices and
prices of other foods through the roof. In modern agriculture, as it
has become after the green revolution, lots of oil is used, not only
for running tractors and other machines, but also for making
fertilizers and pesticides. As the price of oil rises, it is becoming
difficult for third world farmers to buy the necessary oil based
products. They compete with rich nations that use the oil for lots of
industrial processes. When the industrialized nations bid for oil on
the market, the prize tends to get set higher than the poorer producer
can afford. The result may be that they buy less fertilizer than the
crops need, which leads to poorer harvests, which would rise the price
through lack of supply. Either that, or they do buy the fertilizer
they need, and then must transfer the cost to the buyers, which is
another mechanism for rising the price.

I'm not as sure about all this as I might sound; I haven't found any
hard data, but it might be worth investigating, perhaps. It's a shame
that I can't seem to find out how much oil is typically used to
produce a ton of rice or, for that matter, a ton of wheat or corn.

S.
Something like this? http://tinyurl.com/56wabw

The USDA tracks all sorts of things. There might be more information
there. A couple links:
http://www.ers.usda.gov/
http://www.nass.usda.gov/
Some info and commentary: http://tinyurl.com/ysdwjq
Americans spend about 10% of our income on food. A farmer gets about
20% of that on average.

Dean

Thank you, Dean!
Those links are food for thought, I must say. Nothing on the amounts
of oil used to produce pesticides and synthetic fertilizers, though,
but at least it's a start. (Except I'll have to convert it all into
SI-units before I can begin to grok it.)

S.

More here if you like wading through the numbers:
http://tinyurl.com/5aj47j

Corn yields are gradually rising as genetics and farming practices
change. I think last year's crop averaged somewhere around 150
bushels/acre. I guess geneticists are developing a plant more suitable
for ethanol production.
I remember an ag boom back in the middle 1970s. Corn hit about
$3.25/bushel or so. The boom lasted a couple years. Production rose
and demand slackened. Corn prices dropped under $2/bushel at times
since then. There were quite a few good farmers that went broke.