FARMERS OPINION
I have been a "lurker" for several years. I enjoy hearing the opinions
and thoughts of all of you out there posting to this board. I commend you
for sharing your ideas and technology with regards to any type of
alternative fuel (biofuel or not). I also commend you for allowing
discussion between posters of off-topic subjects. I think most of these
off-topic conversations are indeed connected with our energy supply here in
the USA and the world in general. The creation and use of "any"
alternative energy does have a place on this board.
With that said let me introduce myself and explain my personal farming
operation so that you might better understand how my opinions have been
formed over the years. I sincerely believe that my personal, financial, and
farming experiences are probably a good example of some "real farmers" in
the USA today.
I live in the Big Horn Basin of Wyoming, am married, and have two
sons ages 19 and 21. I have been farming since 1981. My father was a
farmer as was his father. My great grandfather immigrated to the US around
the turn of the century from the Volga Valley in Russia-Germany. He was a
farmer as well. I raise sugar beets, malt barley, dry beans, and alfalfa
seed. I farm about 500 acres of irrigated land. I (and the bank) own 350
acres and I rent 150 acres. For every dollar of assets I have 75 cents
worth of debt - this ratio fluctuates from year to year by as much as 10%.
My total debt on land and equipment is close to $500,000.
On a typical year I will borrow at least $200,000 to operate my
farm. At the end of the year I will pay back the $200,000 plus interest. I
will also make an interest and principal payment on the land and equipment
debt. Every spring when I plant a crop I make the following
assumptions......
weather will be good
irrigation water will be adequate
interest rates will remain constant
prices for fertilizer, seed, pesticides, labor, etc will not
go up more that I have projected
prices for the crops that I raise will not go down any lower
than I have projected
I will be able to work every day and not be laid up by some
health problem or accident
my estimated yields for each crop will be at least what I
have projected and no lower
I realize that other types of business make similar projections of
expenses, income and productivity.
The difference is that other businesses set their own price for their goods
and services. They all work with similar costs and
are rewarded if they can manage financial, labor, overhead, etc. expenses
better than their competitor down the street or across the nation. If
they do this they have a higher profit margin and will stay in business
unlike some of their competitors.
As you read this I am sure all of you think - so what, farms and ranches
that produce food are no different. Well I am here to tell you there is a
lot of difference. With the typical business in any community across the US
there is a finite number of customers for the product or service that is
offered for sale. If there are 100 gas stations and 50 clothing stores in
small city and there are only customers for half this many gas stations and
clothing stores then 50% of them will go out of business in a short time.
If somehow some of them are able to lower their costs and consequently lower
their prices to consumers then they will remain in business. At the same
time this happens, all of their competitors have to lower their prices to
stay competitive.
Wall-Mart is a good example of this. Some small businesses can compete
with Wall-Mart and some can't. What happened to the finite number of
customers you ask. They are still there. As the price of goods and
services go down to the consumer they will buy more clothes, gas, cars,
toys, homes, etc. If there income has gone up they will even consume more
of these items. The cheaper these goods and services become the more people
will buy them. There is a limit to this scenario on the production side of
these products. If the producers of these goods and services can no longer
lower their costs and consequently their prices then the finite number of
customers comes into play. At some point if prices remain the same the
finite number of customers will limit the number or size of businesses that
remain profitable. The average consumer will buy a third car, a tenth suit
or dress, a larger home, take another vacation, etc. if given the financial
means to do so but there is a point where this stops based on the finite
number of consumers.
The production of food from farms and ranches in the USA and the
world does have its similarities to other goods and services but it also has
some huge differences. Food is a basic necessity for life unlike the third
car, larger home, etc. There is an infinite number of consumers for cheap
food worldwide. Basic food - corn, soybeans, wheat, etc is a world
commodity that has no limit for consumption at a cheap price. There is a
finite number of consumers for cheap food in the US.
The average consumer of food in the US will not eat more food in a given
day. Yes he or she will eat and pay for higher quality, easier to prepare,
steak vs. hamburger, etc. but not more food in general. As an individual
farmer or rancher I am forced to do the same thing any business is to
survive. Because my costs of production go up every year like most
businesses I have simple choices - either raise my price or produce more
for less. Raising my price is not an option it just doesn't work that way
for an individual farm or ranch. As I said before there is a worldwide
market for the food we produce at a cheap price. There are large commodity
companies that buy my crop right off of the farm and distribute it world
wide - the cheaper it is the more they can handle and sell and the more
profit they make. That leaves me with the choice of producing more for
less. The American farmer and rancher has been doing this for the last 100
years to survive. We have been doing this with the help of US land grant
universities in each state around the country. And yes we do receive help
from the USDA in many different ways. And yes we do receive other help from
the US government in the form of subsidy payments, import quota's, disaster
aid, drought aid, etc. After seeing people in Europe starve during the
early 1900's the US government adopted what we farmers and ranchers call
the "cheap food policy". Our government never wanted to see the people in
the US go hungry like the Europeans did. Consequently the US government
has encouraged overproduction of food in the US so it would always be
available (in surplus) and be available at a cheap price to the consumer.
This is an admirable policy and it has worked well for the American
consumer. You say, oh but the price of food has gone up, and you are
right - to a point.
I will not quote all of the numbers but you are welcome to look them up
yourself. The percentage of average consumer disposable income spent on
food has declined steadily since 1900. The producers (farmer and rancher)
share of this food dollar has remained constant or gone up very little in
the last 50 years. Most all of the price increase in the cost of food has
been in the freight, processing, packaging, and marketing area. Very little
of the price increase of food can you blame on the American farmer or
rancher. If you don't believe me do some research and you will see that I
am right. A simple example of this is what farmers in the Big Horn Basin of
Wyoming are paid for malt barley at the present time. In the late 1960's we
were getting paid about $8 per cwt for malt barley in Basin,Wy, a case of
premium beer (Bud or Coors) was about $4.50. In 2003 we will be paid $7.25
per cwt and the same beer sells for about $12. If you look at dry
beans(pinto beans), sugar beets(sugar), and almost any other food item you
will find that the producer(farmer/rancher) is getting the same price he was
20, 30, and 50 years ago. Over this same period prices for basic equipment
to raise these crops has increased dramatically - 100 hp tractor in 1970 was
$15,000 and in 2003 is $80,000. To keep up with these rising costs of
production, stagnant commodity prices, and lower consumer food dollar share
farmers and ranchers have done one or both of the following. We have
increased yield per acre and or expanded (increased the size of our store
not unlike Wall-Mart). The expansion process has not necessarily increased
commodity production it has simply increased efficiencies and profit
margins. This is why you see more and more large corporate farms across the
country - Wall-Mart type farms. This expansion in size has been a
relatively recent development coming on slowly for the past 20 to 30 years.
I think it has dramatically escalated in the last 10 years though. Part of
the expansion process has involved farming land that was not farmed 30 years
ago and this has contributed to surplus commodity stocks and lower prices.
The main thing that farmers have done to produce the commodity surpluses we
see today is produce more of the same crop per acre or simply put -
increased yields. We have done this through the use of new varieties,
increased use of fertilizer, and many other management practices that are
becoming more perfected every year.
I agree some of these practices are not easy on the environment and
do contribute to the polluting of our planet. But it is not by choice that
we as farmers and ranchers do this, it is by necessity - the necessity to
survive and make a living doing what we do best. We (farmers and ranchers)
collectively are our own worst enemy. The more we produce as an individual
farm or ranch business to survive and make a living the more we contribute
to the surplus of a given commodity. This food commodity will always have a
consumer waiting to buy it especially if it is cheaper in price. The
obvious evidence of this is the millions and millions of starving people in
the world that go without food every day. These poor people are not
concerned with a third car or bigger house. These people are not concerned
with even a single car or house. For these millions of people their first
and only concern, even above a simple hut to live in, is FOOD- where will
I get something to eat today so
I can simply stay alive for tomorrow. We as farmers and ranchers in the US
are faced with this simple problem unique only to food. The more we produce
to stay in business the cheaper it will get and we will never fill the
demand for food in the world based on these criteria. 100 years ago the
market for US produced food was only the US. Now we are in a global market
for food. This has changed for the same reasons other products are in a
global market - the main reason being world transportation and
communication are faster and more efficient and products can be produced on
one side of the globe and sold on another side within days or weeks instead
of months or years. Because of this any surplus food produced in the US,
and the world for that matter, is discounted in price sold and even
given away to poor people in underdeveloped countries. Until that need for
food by underdeveloped countries is met there is no hope for US agriculture
to increase our own prices. We can never met that need as long as these
countries have no money to buy food that is priced based on our cost of
production. They will continue however to consume our surplus at a price
much lower than our cost of production thus always driving our price
downward. If these poor people had the money to buy food from US farmers
"at the cost of production plus reasonable profit" I am convinced the US
could feed the entire world!!!
You might say - well then, why don't the farmers and ranchers get
together and produce less, create a shortage, and raise their prices to a
profitable level. Besides the fact that this could never be done given the
dynamics of agriculture in the US and the moral issues it would raise in the
US and the world, our government would never allow this to happen because of
the cheap food policy I explained earlier. This would be a monopoly in its
simplest form dealing with a basic necessity for life-food. The government
simply couldn't and wouldn't allow this to happen. Consequently we as
farmers and ranchers are left to seek help from the government so that we
can stay in business to produce the food necessary to feed the US and a lot
of the world at a very cheap price.
You might say - well, we don't need the American farmer we can buy
all the food we need at a cheaper price from
overseas. On the surface this sounds reasonable but beware!!! Can you
imagine if the US were dependent on food from a group of foreign countries
like were are dependant on oil from OPEC. We can all drive our cars less,
turn our thermostats down, etc. to conserve energy. We can develop
alternative sources of energy to replace oil. We could in an emergency
get by without importing any oil with the reserves we have in the US - for
how long I don't know. But when it comes to food
it gets a little scarier. Yes we could all eat less and waste less. I
really don't know of any alternative for sustaining life that will replace
food. If the US ever gets to the point where we rely heavily on imported
food like we do oil then look out. Overnight those countries would and
could raise prices for food to whatever they wanted and we would be
helpless to do anything about it. If you think it takes a lot of
infrastructure to produce oil and gas from the ground take a look at food.
For the most part it is a perishable item and requires considerably broader
and different inputs to produce than oil. If you think you could get by as
an individual person or family with less oil and gas you are probably
correct. If you think you could get by as an individual person or family
with less food-think again. If you think we are probably going to war with
Iraq over oil then think of how quick we would be to go to war over food.
This is exactly the reason for the "cheap food policy" our government has
had for the last 80 years.
For those of you that complain about subsidies and financial aid to
agriculture in the US I have this to say...you won't like it I am
sure.......The largest nationwide subsidy to the broadest class of people in
all walks of life rich or poor is the food you eat every day. The American
farmer and rancher produce the cheapest, highest quality, and most available
food today in the world. If you don't believe me try buying the same food
you eat here in the US on a daily basis in any other country in the world
and see what it costs!!!!! This is being done with your help as tax paying
citizens of the US through the USDA and other government programs that some
of you complain so much about. It is also being done with the hard work and
ingenuity of the typical American farmer and rancher and the many industries
that supply goods and services to American agriculture. As of the last few
years it is also being done with equity that has been built up over the past
100 years by farmers and ranchers all across the nation that are still
supplying the American consumer with cheap food at a price lower than the
cost of producing that food.
This cannot continue to happen without having dire consequences on
the food supply of our nation. I fear that our governments "cheap food
policy" is slowly turning into a "no food policy" if something isn't done
to stop the current trend in American agriculture. As our food supply
depends more and more on imports and large corporate farms in the US we are
slowly loosing control of what we now take for granted.
Tying this all back to biofuel......farmers in the US would love to
produce ethanol, biodiesel, wind power, etc. but most of them don't have any
financial means to pursue these things- they are simply living from one year
to the next financially and trying to stay in business. Personally I have
been interested in these alternative energy sources for a long time but I
don't have the money to pursue any of it. I share all of your thoughts on
why we need to develop this type of energy and am completely in support of
it as I think most farmers would be. I feel that American agriculture
could produce food as well as clean energy. We have a tremendous amount of
wasted byproducts in agriculture that could be used to produce clean energy
not to mention raising specific crops for energy use. In some areas of the
US there are vast amounts of land with available water that are not being
put to use - we need to developed our own natural resources to produce food
and energy in a non-polluting sustainable way. As usual the most limiting
factor is economics. If farmers and ranchers are expected to take part in
this we have to first be allowed to make a reasonable profit on the products
we are producing now. Any future developments in alternative energy that
are associated with agriculture have to allow a profit for all of those
involved including the farmer and rancher.
In conclusion, I apologize for the length of this post but I don't
think most people realize where we are heading in the US in regards to our
food supply and it is just as important as our energy supply. Someone asked
where the farmers were and why none of them were responding - just consider
that I have responded for a couple dozen of us. If you have children and
grandchildren and have any concern for future generations please give some
thought to what I have said.
Please feel free to comment,
Thank You, Phil
Hartman
----- Original Message -----
From: <biofuel@yahoogroups.com>
To: <biofuel@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, February 08, 2003 6:35 AM
Subject: [biofuel] Digest Number 1354
> Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
> http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
>
> Biofuels list archives:
> http://archive.nnytech.net/
>
> Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
> To unsubscribe, send an email to:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> There are 3 messages in this issue.
>
> Topics in this digest:
>
> 1. Re: Obstacles facing small producers and co-ops in the US
> From: Keith Addison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 2. Re: Obstacles facing small producers and co-ops in the US
> From: "motie_d <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 3. Re: Obstacles facing small producers and co-ops in the US
> From: Keith Addison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 8 Feb 2003 16:58:30 +0900
> From: Keith Addison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Obstacles facing small producers and co-ops in the US
>
> Hi Mark
>
> Thankyou, very interesting (as ever).
>
> Just to note that I don't think we regarded the NBB stranglehold on
> the EPA Tier II health effects data as the only barrier to
> small-scale biod. It wasn't just a barrier, it was a door slammed and
> bolted. Until that was resolved it just didn't seem worth trying
> anything else. So, now that the door is open, at least in theory, all
> the other barriers emerge, which may or may not be negotiable, but
> most of them probably are in one way or another, eventually.
>
> However, it's a bit ironic that, from what you're saying, the best
> place to start still seems to be in rural communities using local
> feedstocks, waste streams etc, and supplying fuel for off-road use -
> which is the same situation as before the NBB roadblack was resolved.
>
> I've written a lot here and at the Biofuel list and elsewhere about
> on-farm energy and biofuels production. Odd... Ed Beggs (if you don't
> mind Ed) and I have just been wondering off-list about this matter of
> farmers. Ed said: "...why so few farmers? You'd think they'd be all
> over the list....maybe they just lurk a bit and then quietly go build
> stuff we have not even thought of yet, for about $10, plus some
> broken cultivator bits, eh?"
>
> Maybe - hopefully... But I've encountered very few here, and in the
> biodiesel world generally, and the few I have encountered haven't
> been doing it very well. Often not that much better than the Illinois
> soy and wheat farmers crying over the lost subsidies for their wind
> farm, with apparently never a thought for biodiesel or ethanol power,
> or all the US chicken farmers (factory farmers) and their wails of
> anguish over heating bills every winter, despite all that eminently
> biogasable chicken litter they seem to have so much trouble disposing
> of (though of course a lot of chicken shit gets fed to cattle).
>
> Ho hum.
>
> Best
>
> Keith
>
>
> >(I'm crossposting this, read the rest of the thread below if you didnt
get
> >this through the biofuel list... The thread started with a new person
> >asking why there aren't more small biodiesel producer businesses since it
> >seems so easy, and continued with Keith Addison pointing out that some of
> >the regulatory red tape is sudenly gone but there hasn't been much of a
> >test case of that yet)
> >
> >
> > One piece of the 'red tape' involved in small scale biodiesel
production-
> >the NBB stranglehold on the EPA Tier II health effects testing results-
> >seems to have been cleared. Though a lot of people don't know that- I
think
> >the Blue Sun Biodiesel folks I talked to a few weeks ago didn't know
about
> >that (can't remember if it was the Blue Sun rep or another large-scale
> >biodiesel advocacy guy who was with the Blue Sun guy, sorry if I get this
> >wrong guys). Seems to me that, like with many victories where big
business
> >loses a legal battle, the NBB and whomever didn't make a very loud stink
> >about their loss, and biodiesel people who weren't on these lists don't
> >seem to be very aware of that.
> >
> >
> >But there's still plenty more red tape and obstacles, of the local and
> >state-level and zoning and regulations variety. I'm watching a few people
> >go through varying levels of interaction with the government and
blundering
> >in red tape- one for a business and one for a bulk buying coop, in two
> >different cities, and our coop is no doubt going to go through the same
thing.
> >
> >The small producer business is finding that Oakland would require a site
to
> >be zoned 'heavy industrial' - a huge obstacle to a small business trying
to
> >break into biodiesel production here. There is far more more warehouse
and
> >industrial real estate in this city (and most of them I imagine) that is
> >zoned light industrial, than heavy industrial. There is sometimes little
> >difference between the types of facilities, and we all of course feel
that
> >a small producer would do fine in a light industrial warehouse, and have
> >little impact on the immediate environment or neighborhood. Yet they're
yet
> >to convince the city otherwise of course- (changes to zoning regulations
> >are a hellish process if you're not a real estate developer or otherwise
> >well connected politically). Other would-be small producers are finding
> >insurance to be unavailable or prohibitive. This pretty much kills a
> >business like this, or makes it impossible to find certain kinds of
> >investment or funding, and nonprofit status doesn't help in the cases I
> >know about.
> >
> >Keith mentioned 'various kinds of coops' below. The bulk buying coop
I;ve
> >got in mind (not us in Berkeley, a coop in another city) wants to
purchase
> >some bulk biodiesel and put it into a tank to dispense to members. They
are
> >trying to go about all of this as legitimately as possible (some coops
are
> >not organized this way, and personally I think the most practical thing
at
> >this point in time is to do city-based coop work 'under the radar' and on
a
> >very, very small scale)
> >
> >anyway they got a donated small aboveground diesel storage tank like that
> >used on farms and by businesses that use generators, and cleaned out the
> >sludge using some biodiesel. One member called the fire department to
find
> >out where to take the wastes (in the US we have local household hazardous
> >wastes disposal facilities that accept stuff like this). The fire
> >department immediately 'freaked out' and wanted to know where the tank
was
> >and how it was set up (the member didn't tell them the exact location).
The
> >upshot of their conversation is that for them to do this, biodiesel or
not,
> >they would have to buy an expensive doublewalled tank (too bad "they"
> >didn't have those regulations in effect for the oil tanker that crashed
off
> >of Spain this winter!), with a bunch of other safety devices on it- and
> >they wouldn't be able to do it in city limits without spending a huge
pile
> >of money, if at all (sorry I unfortunately don't remember all the details
> >beyond the 'containment' and the 'doublewalled tank' part. I hope I got
> >that one right). The irony is that the city they're in is surrounded by
an
> >agricultural county- and if they were just out on someone's farm right
> >outside town, that kind of very common and safe diesel tank would have
been
> >just fine the way that they'd set it up. But that defeats the purpose of
> >having a coop centrally located where members can come work on it easily
> >and don't necessarily have to drive to get there to do their volunteer
> >work, among other issues (like them perhaps not having a member with a
farm
> >nearby). So with this and other problems they're finding that they may
not
> >even be able to do the MOST basic part of a coop legitimately- buying
some
> >fuel in bulk and dispensing it to each other (taxes are all paid in this
> >scenario, and everyone involved wants to 'play by the rules' and do this
> >legitimately). the problems facing a city-based coop trying to actually
> >MAKE fuel for themselves 'above ground'- ie in full knowledge of local
> >authorities- are insurmountable in my opinion. No one's gonna insure
> >amateurs playing with flammable chemicals, for instance. It seems to me
> >that the obstacles facing small producers in a city are going to be
> >similarly expensive and painful. It also seems that if you leave city
> >limits it becomes easier. I would be interested in hearing anecdotes from
> >others- small producers, coops, whatever- who have successfully or
> >unsuccessfully interacted with the authorities. It seems to me that we
> >focused so much on the NBB-controlled process for access to the EPA Tier
II
> >health effects data as an obstacle that we haven't talked much about the
> >local issues.
> >
> >We talk a lot about the great potential of biodiesel for revolutionizing
> >and decentralizing energy production. It's been really interesting to me
to
> >see it play out in real life over the past year- lots of people trying to
> >start coops, few of them are any kind of blazing success- and with the
EPA
> >regs lifted, many people starting to contemplate becoming small
> >producers. What 'decentralized energy production' looks like is anyone;s
> >guess- there are so many different ways to organize it and so few recent
> >models (you can't look at past solar stuff for this one, nor to farm
wastes
> >ethanol- WVO biodiesel is unique in that the energy already comes to you
in
> >the decentralized form of waste). Given also that September 11th has
> >galvanized many people into making the connection between power, oil,
and
> >American foreign policy, there is also a huge amount of idealism and a
lot
> >of desire (at least here) to make 'decentralized energy production' work
> >out. I'm seeing lots of that idealism dashed somewhat by the realities
such
> >as those anecdotes above, realities of insurance, etc. Again, like Keith
in
> >the post below, I'm interested in hearing more of the stories of people
in
> >other areas who have had successful or unsuccessful interactions with the
> >regulations surrounding all of this.
> >
> >mark
> >
> >
> >At 03:03 AM 2/8/2003 +0900, you wrote:
> > > >commercially, the road is fraught with red tape and government
> >interference.
> > > >This is why we make it ourselves, for ourselves, and teach
> >others to do the
> > > >same.
> > > >Steve Spence
> > >
> > >It seems as lot of the red tape and pure obstruction to small-scale
> > >operators may have been cleared away, largely as a result of work
> > >done by various list members here and at Biofuels-Biz. Lots of info
> > >in the archives about all this - really lots. Check out "EPA hassle"
> > >in both archives. However, it still needed a test case, and I haven't
> > >heard of one.
> > >
> > >Bill Clark, if you're listening, any news for us on this? Or anyone
else?
> > >
> > >There are also other options - various kinds of coops, fuel for
> > >off-road use, etc. Actually, from what I hear and enquiries I get,
> > >there seems to be a large number of people at various stages of
> > >starting biodiesel and biofuels operations in the US (since you're
> > >talking about the US), and also elsewhere, in Britain, India,
> > >Thailand...
> > >
> > >Let's have some news about what's going on out there, you good folks
> > >who're doing it. Tell us your plans, progress, problems and
> > >constraints, if you can, without giving too much away. It would be
> > >good to try to get some sort of view of how it's all developing at
> > >that level.
> > >
> > >Best wishes
> > >
> > >Keith
> > >
> > >
> > > >Subscribe to the Renewable Energy Newsletter
> > > >& Discussion Boards. Read about Sustainable Technology:
> > > ><http://www.green-trust.org>http://www.green-trust.org
> > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >----- Original Message -----
> > > >From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > >To: <biofuel@yahoogroups.com>
> > > >Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 2:57 AM
> > > >Subject: [biofuel] so i got one more ?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > and i read many archives i just searched for the wrong phrases i
> > > > > guess, and way the question is, how come people aren't opening
> > > > > biodiesel fuel operations, like for home heating, or cars even?,
it
> > > > > seems being so cheap and easy it would have caught on a lot
faster?,
> > > > > maybe you guys can explain this to me
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sat, 08 Feb 2003 09:28:18 -0000
> From: "motie_d <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Obstacles facing small producers and co-ops in the US
>
> --- In biofuel@yahoogroups.com, Keith Addison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > >
> > I've written a lot here and at the Biofuel list and elsewhere about
> > on-farm energy and biofuels production. Odd... Ed Beggs (if you
> don't
> > mind Ed) and I have just been wondering off-list about this matter
> of
> > farmers. Ed said: "...why so few farmers? You'd think they'd be all
> > over the list....maybe they just lurk a bit and then quietly go
> build
> > stuff we have not even thought of yet, for about $10, plus some
> > broken cultivator bits, eh?"
>
> My perception is that the farmers are waiting for Big Business to
> take the leadership role, get government involved to provide
> subsidies and a guaranteed profit, then they'll go for it.
> >
> > Maybe - hopefully... But I've encountered very few here, and in the
> > biodiesel world generally, and the few I have encountered haven't
> > been doing it very well. Often not that much better than the
> Illinois
> > soy and wheat farmers crying over the lost subsidies for their wind
> > farm, with apparently never a thought for biodiesel or ethanol
> power,
> > or all the US chicken farmers (factory farmers) and their wails of
> > anguish over heating bills every winter, despite all that eminently
> > biogasable chicken litter they seem to have so much trouble
> disposing
> > of (though of course a lot of chicken shit gets fed to cattle).
>
> They've been brainwashed and trained for so many years to depend on
> governemnt to guarantee them a positive income, that it seems to be
> inconceivable for them to make any investment on their own. Even
> their Cooperative ventures are all governmentally underwritten.
> >
> > Ho hum.
> >
> > Best
> >
> > Keith
> >
> Me too,
> Motie
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sat, 8 Feb 2003 19:47:23 +0900
> From: Keith Addison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Obstacles facing small producers and co-ops in the US
>
> Hi Motie
>
> >--- In biofuel@yahoogroups.com, Keith Addison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > I've written a lot here and at the Biofuel list and elsewhere about
> > > on-farm energy and biofuels production. Odd... Ed Beggs (if you
> >don't
> > > mind Ed) and I have just been wondering off-list about this matter
> >of
> > > farmers. Ed said: "...why so few farmers? You'd think they'd be all
> > > over the list....maybe they just lurk a bit and then quietly go
> >build
> > > stuff we have not even thought of yet, for about $10, plus some
> > > broken cultivator bits, eh?"
> >
> >My perception is that the farmers are waiting for Big Business to
> >take the leadership role, get government involved to provide
> >subsidies and a guaranteed profit, then they'll go for it.
> > >
> > > Maybe - hopefully... But I've encountered very few here, and in the
> > > biodiesel world generally, and the few I have encountered haven't
> > > been doing it very well. Often not that much better than the
> >Illinois
> > > soy and wheat farmers crying over the lost subsidies for their wind
> > > farm, with apparently never a thought for biodiesel or ethanol
> >power,
> > > or all the US chicken farmers (factory farmers) and their wails of
> > > anguish over heating bills every winter, despite all that eminently
> > > biogasable chicken litter they seem to have so much trouble
> >disposing
> > > of (though of course a lot of chicken shit gets fed to cattle).
> >
> >They've been brainwashed and trained for so many years to depend on
> >governemnt to guarantee them a positive income, that it seems to be
> >inconceivable for them to make any investment on their own. Even
> >their Cooperative ventures are all governmentally underwritten.
>
> I guess so. Had arguments here in the past about "helping" them, when
> I said what was the use when they'd been sitting on such a well-known
> answer for so long and didn't even know it - hell, if I know it, a
> journalist living in Japan, none of my business even, but they don't,
> and it's very much their business? Let them all die, I said, they're
> dinosaurs anyway. (Fine critters dinosaurs.) The whole idea of
> concentrated livestock operations is doomed anyway, there's nothing
> sustainable about it. That view didn't get me a very good press - an
> offended person posted details of how he'd helped turkey farmers or
> something "convert" to renewable energy, and, sure, I guess that
> means they're using less fossil fuels and doing a bit less pollution,
> hooray and all, but it STILL isn't sustainable, and the guy should
> have been able to figure it for himself instead of paying megabucks
> to a consultancy, FCOL. "Brainwashed" and "trained" doesn't, to me,
> describe anyone who's competent to hold any stewardship over either
> soil or livestock. Anyway, as a final comment perhaps, here's a study
> that found that the production from such industrialized "farming"
> operations, in this case eggs, were less nutritious than no eggs at
> all.
>
>
http://www.rhealiving.com/gcrfarm/farm_and_poultry/Free_Range_Eggs_Study.htm
> Free-Range Eggs vs. Grocery Store Eggs in Chicks
>
> Ho hom again.
>
> :-/
>
> Best
>
> Keith
>
>
> > > Ho hum.
> > >
> > > Best
> > >
> > > Keith
> > >
> >Me too,
> >Motie
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/
Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
