FOOD BIO-Fuel caused Food Crisis?

Worrier King

Inactive
Possible.

A SECRET IS SAFE AMONG 2 PEOPLE IF ONE OF THEM IS DEAD.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/jul/03/biofuels.renewableenergy
Secret report: biofuel caused food crisis

Internal World Bank study delivers blow to plant energy drive

* Aditya Chakrabortty
* The Guardian,
* Friday July 4, 2008
* Article history

Corn used for biofuel

A handful of corn before it is processed. Photograph: Charlie Neibergall/AP

Biofuels have forced global food prices up by 75% - far more than previously estimated - according to a confidential World Bank report obtained by the Guardian.

The damning unpublished assessment is based on the most detailed analysis of the crisis so far, carried out by an internationally-respected economist at global financial body.

The figure emphatically contradicts the US government's claims that plant-derived fuels contribute less than 3% to food-price rises. It will add to pressure on governments in Washington and across Europe, which have turned to plant-derived fuels to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and reduce their dependence on imported oil.

Senior development sources believe the report, completed in April, has not been published to avoid embarrassing President George Bush.

"It would put the World Bank in a political hot-spot with the White House," said one yesterday.

The news comes at a critical point in the world's negotiations on biofuels policy. Leaders of the G8 industrialised countries meet next week in Hokkaido, Japan, where they will discuss the food crisis and come under intense lobbying from campaigners calling for a moratorium on the use of plant-derived fuels.

It will also put pressure on the British government, which is due to release its own report on the impact of biofuels, the Gallagher Report. The Guardian has previously reported that the British study will state that plant fuels have played a "significant" part in pushing up food prices to record levels. Although it was expected last week, the report has still not been released.

"Political leaders seem intent on suppressing and ignoring the strong evidence that biofuels are a major factor in recent food price rises," said Robert Bailey, policy adviser at Oxfam. "It is imperative that we have the full picture. While politicians concentrate on keeping industry lobbies happy, people in poor countries cannot afford enough to eat."

Rising food prices have pushed 100m people worldwide below the poverty line, estimates the World Bank, and have sparked riots from Bangladesh to Egypt. Government ministers here have described higher food and fuel prices as "the first real economic crisis of globalisation".

President Bush has linked higher food prices to higher demand from India and China, but the leaked World Bank study disputes that: "Rapid income growth in developing countries has not led to large increases in global grain consumption and was not a major factor responsible for the large price increases."

Even successive droughts in Australia, calculates the report, have had a marginal impact. Instead, it argues that the EU and US drive for biofuels has had by far the biggest impact on food supply and prices.

Since April, all petrol and diesel in Britain has had to include 2.5% from biofuels. The EU has been considering raising that target to 10% by 2020, but is faced with mounting evidence that that will only push food prices higher.

"Without the increase in biofuels, global wheat and maize stocks would not have declined appreciably and price increases due to other factors would have been moderate," says the report. The basket of food prices examined in the study rose by 140% between 2002 and this February. The report estimates that higher energy and fertiliser prices accounted for an increase of only 15%, while biofuels have been responsible for a 75% jump over that period.

It argues that production of biofuels has distorted food markets in three main ways. First, it has diverted grain away from food for fuel, with over a third of US corn now used to produce ethanol and about half of vegetable oils in the EU going towards the production of biodiesel. Second, farmers have been encouraged to set land aside for biofuel production. Third, it has sparked financial speculation in grains, driving prices up higher.

Other reviews of the food crisis looked at it over a much longer period, or have not linked these three factors, and so arrived at smaller estimates of the impact from biofuels. But the report author, Don Mitchell, is a senior economist at the Bank and has done a detailed, month-by-month analysis of the surge in food prices, which allows much closer examination of the link between biofuels and food supply.

The report points out biofuels derived from sugarcane, which Brazil specializes in, have not had such a dramatic impact.

Supporters of biofuels argue that they are a greener alternative to relying on oil and other fossil fuels, but even that claim has been disputed by some experts, who argue that it does not apply to US production of ethanol from plants.

"It is clear that some biofuels have huge impacts on food prices," said Dr David King, the government's former chief scientific adviser, last night. "All we are doing by supporting these is subsidising higher food prices, while doing nothing to tackle climate change."
 

Thunderbird

Veteran Member
Utter BS. The corn used to produce ethanol is yellow field corn, anamal feed for you in Rio Lindo. Sweet corn is used for human consumption. 80+% of the initial food value
is available for animal consumption AFTER processing the corn for ethanol, so there is a net loss of less than 20% of the ANIMAL food. Can you spell false flag?????????????
 

Worrier King

Inactive
Utter BS. The corn used to produce ethanol is yellow field corn, anamal feed for you in Rio Lindo. Sweet corn is used for human consumption. 80+% of the initial food value
is available for animal consumption AFTER processing the corn for ethanol, so there is a net loss of less than 20% of the ANIMAL food. Can you spell false flag?????????????

Great feedback and thanks for that information. It's interesting the World Bank is behind this, they being globalists to the max.

And the globalists - advocating a 500 million human world population - perpetuating this type of info.
 

cvk

Inactive
UM--they don't put sweet corn in the cornmeal for your breakfast cereal, tortillas, cornbread and etc etc etc. Not to mention that increased corn acreage means less acreage for other food crops. It isn't as cut and dried as you would make it sound.
 

Emily

One Day Closer
UM--they don't put sweet corn in the cornmeal for your breakfast cereal, tortillas, cornbread and etc etc etc. Not to mention that increased corn acreage means less acreage for other food crops. It isn't as cut and dried as you would make it sound.

That is what I was thinking too.
 

PHD

Veteran Member
I think it is a red herring to think that biofuel has pushed food prices up 75%.

However, it's not just about corn. It is about a limited amount of land used for farming. If they can make more money putting in crops for biofuel, that is exactly what they will do.
 

NC Susan

Deceased
[FONT=Verdana,Arial]snip From:

http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/showthread.php?t=293542



...................With soaring food prices high on the agenda for next week's G-8 Summit in Japan, World Bank President Robert Zoellick has been clear that action needs to be taken. "What we are witnessing is not a natural disaster -- a silent tsunami or a perfect storm," he wrote in a Tuesday letter to major Western leaders. "It is a man-made catastrophe, and as such must be fixed by people." According to a confidential World Bank report leaked to the Guardian on Thursday, Zoellick's organization may have a pretty good idea what that fix might look like: stop producing biofuels.
The report claims that biofuels have driven up global food prices by 75 percent, according to the Guardian report, accounting for more than half of the 140 percent jump in price since 2002 of the food examined by the study. The paper claims that the report, completed in April, was not made public in order to avoid embarrassing US President George W. Bush.
A US analysis recently came to the conclusion that just 3 percent of the food price increases could be attributed to biofuels..................
[/FONT]
 

Hardpan

Senior Member
One 56 pound bushel of corn produces 18 pounds (2.72 gallons) of ethanol and approximately 17 pounds of distillers grains in various forms: so you lose 2/3's of the dry matter feed.

Some farmers sign contracts to deliver a a certain amount of corn to the plant every year, if they don't grow it they have to buy it and deliver it. That makes a big difference in what gets planted and maybe more importantly what does not get planted.
 

NC Susan

Deceased
One 56 pound bushel of corn produces 18 pounds (2.72 gallons) of ethanol and approximately 17 pounds of distillers grains in various forms: so you lose 2/3's of the dry matter feed....

and if you drive with ethanol, you need five gallons of fuel to go same distance as four gallons of petroleum based gasoline. Its not as efficient and therfore will be even MORE expensive in cost per mile and budget busting.
 

Hardpan

Senior Member
That's exactly the percentage lose in mpg I experience in some vehicles, 10% ethanol= 20% lose in mpg. A real losing situation for the consumer.
 

dragonfly

Inactive
The corn used to produce ethanol is yellow field corn, anamal feed for you in Rio Lindo.

And with the price of that corn going up it's increasing the cost to feed the animals, contributing to the rise in meat prices.
 

Windy Ridge

Veteran Member
Most of the corn IS used for animal feed. I think most of the rise in grain prices is due to stupid agricultural policies of many countries, drought in some major grain exporters and a shift of investment money from the mortgage mess to commodities.

Windy Ridge
 

Desertrat

Inactive
People work hard at being over-simplistic about this whole ethanol deal.

Part of it is the choice by farmers to raise corn instead of, say, hops. In Germany, that raised the price of beer by 15% to 20%. In our Pacific northwest, the reduction in hops put some micro-breweries out of business.

The marketplace competition raised corn prices overall, whether white or yellow or whatever. That raised food prices in Mexico, first. Then it began impacting our feed lots, dairies and poultry farms. In turn, ranchers began culling herds--which first led briefly to a glut of beef and now a lesser quantity coming to market at higher prices.

There's a lot more, but folks need to look at the worldwide picture, not just what is derived from one type of corn, here, in only one particular process.
 

cleobc

Veteran Member
Corn oil is $17.00 a gallon at my local supermarket. No doubt in my mind that is due to ethanol production.
 

Thunderbird

Veteran Member
"of distillers grains in various forms: so you lose 2/3's of the dry matter feed."
Note I said food value not weight.
White corn is used for corn flakes.
Yes more land is being shifted to corn production, possibly some of which was used to produce tobacco. I do not have the numbers. Just how much does the price of hops have to increase the cost of the final product 15-20%??? sounds a little fishy to me.
If you are losing 20% of your mileage by using a 10% ethanol gas mix you really need a new calculator. Based on over 100K of measureing every drop of gasoline in our vehicles
(not tank to tank) I can see a 3% difference in mileage.
Marketplace demand shifts always cause shifts in the economy in a way some one can describe as unpleasant. The cost of raw product, corn, peas, etc is almost always less than 25% of the finished goods. My uncle who was highly placed in one of the major suppliers of canned veggies once told me the label on the can cost more than the contents.
Lots of games being played here.
 

Emily

One Day Closer
and if you drive with ethanol, you need five gallons of fuel to go same distance as four gallons of petroleum based gasoline. Its not as efficient and therefore will be even MORE expensive in cost per mile and budget busting.

I also heard somewhere that it also is hard on the rubber seals and can shorten the life of the gasoline engine through premature wearing.

I have not been able to confirm that yet but heard it at the 4th barbecue.
 

summerthyme

Administrator
_______________
Sorry... but you lose almost ALL the "food value" that farmers feed corn for.

Corn is a *high energy* feed... that means calories. That's *why* we feed it, rather than wheat, or oats, or soy. (Soybean meal, which is what is left after they remove the soybean oil for people, also is very high in protein but not high in energy. WHOLE soy (usually roasted beans, because raw ones have toxic properties and aren't digested well) are high in energy, but have traditionally been 2-3X the price of corn.

The use of corn for biofuels isn't the ONLY reason food prices are skyrocketing, but it certainly is a very large part. We have a very tight global supply situation in all grains at this point, and any shifting of acres traditionally planted to wheat or other crops to corn (because of the higher profit potential) creates a very significant ripple effect across the board.

But at this point, probably THE biggest reason for food prices rising is the cost of petroleum... it's raised the cost of pretty much every single input- from the cost of machinery, to fertilizer, to seed (because it all costs more to grow) to the obvious diesel required for plowing, planting and harvest... plus propane for drying the grain.

You could pass a law stopping the use of corn for ethanol tomorrow, and it might loosen up the grain supply situation some, but it wouldn't change food prices back very much.

Summerthyme
 

Hardpan

Senior Member
I had an 86 buick, if I filled up in MN with 10% ethanol (and who knows how much water) it got 20 mpg, if I filled up in SD it got 25 mpg, repeatable every single time. In the pickups the mileage wasn't so noticeable as was the loss of power.

A shortage does cause the price to go up, a shortfall, such as the hops causes companies to go out of business because the product isn't available. Let's just hope there is enough of the different crops that make it to harvest that there isn't a shortfall.
 

Alan2012

Inactive
80+% of the initial food value
is available for animal consumption AFTER processing the corn for ethanol, so there is a net loss of less than 20% of the ANIMAL food.
That struck me as "must be wrong" on first contact, because if the
energy extraction was that low, then it would barely be worth doing,
i.e. the whole processing operation to get ethanol would not be worth
doing, if it is true that 80% of the calories remain behind.

Then someone wrote:
"One 56 pound bushel of corn produces 18 pounds (2.72 gallons) of ethanol"
... and, doing a quick back-of-envelope calculation, it seems that the
process extracts at least 80% of the energy/calories from whole corn --
about what I expected, and the opposite of the figure above. In other
words, ethanol production does NOT leave "80+% of the initial food
value" behind, unless you are defining "food value" in other than calorie
terms (and that would be foolish, since caloric value -- energy -- is the
real deal here).
 

summerthyme

Administrator
_______________
Alan... that's the problem... they are looking at "corn distillers meal" (what you've got left after making ethanol) and saying "gee, look... good animal feed!" BUT... it's higher in protein than whole corn, but you've lost most of the energy- calories.

Which- as you said- is THE main reason most farmers are feeding corn.

Summerthyme
 

Alan2012

Inactive
The "corn shortage" has happened way too fast.
It is too convenient.
Actually, grain reserves have declined for (I believe) 7 consecutive
years. Production is way off. It seems that the vaunted Green Revolution
is running out of steam. But in any case, there was plenty of warning of
this. The warnings go back to the 60s, and even before.
 

Desertrat

Inactive
As long as we're playing with numbers: In Brazil, the ethanol is made from sugar cane. The energy balance is one unit input for ten units produced. For ethanol from corn, the energy balance is seven units input for ten units produced.

Associated problems: A year-after-year monoculture requires more fertilizer to maintain productivity. Sulfuric acid is used in making fertilizer. The price per ton has risen from around $90, last October, to right at $380 in March. Part of the cause is China's increased domestic need, which competes with her export to the U.S.--and Canada, where much of our fertilizer is made.
 
Top