Imagine my surprise! I got in two hours time-on-task today.
It wasn't pulling weeds, though. It was lugging water (38 minutes) with the remainder being cutting wood, loading it into a wheelbarrow and wheeling it to the pile that goes to the guy whose property adjoins the Upper Orchard and who heats with wood. The orchard floor is still a mess and clearing it will make it easier to maintain.
While some of the chunks were substantial, the dead-lifting I have been doing made the physical handling of the wood not-that-bad.
Drought and the price of food
The price that a farmer gets for the amount of wheat that goes into a loaf of bread is less than the cost of the printed, plastic bag that the baker packages the loaf of bread in.
And bread is not typically thought of as a highly processed food. What that means from a practical standpoint is that the price of wheat could double and if nobody in the value-chain took advantage of the excuse, the price of a loaf of bread might increase by five or ten cents.
On the other hand, eggs, beef, pork and chicken are very sensitive to the price of grain because grain is a larger percentage of the cost-per-pound.
Hogs are efficient converters of feed. The last 200 pounds of gain for a 240 pound hog is about 650 pounds of "concentrate", i.e. grain, soymeal, brewer's waste and pedophiles. That 650 pounds of concentrate coverts to about 120 pounds of boneless meat.
The retail price of that concentrate at a "farm store" is about $45/100 pounds or about $2.40 per pound of meat.
Of course, the commercial producers don't pay that much per 100 pounds of feed. They don't by the fancy bags with the pretty pictures on them. But as a home producer, you can get a feel for how sensitive the price of meat is to the price of grain.
Yes, I know that somebody is ALWAYS crying out doom-and-gloom regarding food prices. This year is no exception. Some parts of the corn-belt are in drought status right now. That is a big deal because the soil moisture levels shortly after the corn "tassels" determines how many kernels on each ear are pollinated and that sets an upper limit on the amount of corn that will be harvested, even if abundant rains come afterward.
What if Congress could increase the corn crop by 50%?
Sounds like a stupid question, right? Keep an open mind.
Approximately 35% of the United States corn crop is diverted to ethanol production which is used to adulterate gasoline. Federal law allows gasoline to contain up to 10% ethanol. Various reasons have been given for the practice but in real-politiks it is a backdoor price support for corn producers and it increases the profit margins for the gas-wholesalers. The net increase in energy is virtually nill.
In a rational world, Congress (or the POTUS) would be watching the food market-basket like a hawk and have a series of trigger-points. When the cost of the market-basket punched upward through a trigger-point, the amount of ethanol allowed in motor-fuel would be reduced by some amount...perhaps two percent. Then if it punched through the next trigger-point, reduced by another two percent.
If such a plan was devised (and shared with the industry ahead of time), they could make rational plans regarding the economically rational way to moth-ball marginal ethanol plants with minimal collateral damages.
From the standpoint of the corn producer, if prices are extremely high, then the need for price-supports is not a strong argument.
For the hair-splitters
If 65% of the corn crop is currently used for food, then increasing the amount to 100% is a net increase of 100%/65%. The basis (denominator) should not be the total but the fraction of the total that is currently employed for that purpose.
That is not a 35% increase over current levels. It is a 50% increase.
Ethanol is not "allowed" in fuel, but rather required by the EPA as it is an oxygenator.
ReplyDeleteI read that too. That would be an Executive Branch call.
DeleteRemember, the EPA "determined" that CO2 is an existential threat to life on earth. The radical elements in the EPA would make it illegal for you to exhale.
The dials could be twisted from either the Executive Branch side or the Legislative side.
THis is probably as good of a place as any to point out that the food industry will point out that the most expensive part of animal feed is the protein and distiller's waste has almost all of the protein that the original grain did.
In point-of-fact, the mothballed ethanol plants could CREATE protein in their fermentation vats by adding urea to the carbs and the bloom of yeast would produce more animal-usable protein than the original corn. That all comes down to economics.
Carbs make fat and flavor. Protein makes lean. If you are starving to death, you need fat.
Oxygenates are only required in some PADDs, and then only seasonally. Ethers actually perform better than alcohols, and are directly synthesized, very economically, from natural gas.
DeleteEthers are also inherently energy efficient because they bypass fertilizer production from natural gas as well as the middle distillates and natural gas liquids used by farmers. Ethanol production is a very inefficient way to use natural gas and petroleum to produce motor vehicle liquid fuels.
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 required use of 7,500,000,000 US gal (2.8×1010 L) of renewable fuel by 2012, and the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 raised the standard, to 36,000,000,000 US gal (1.4×1011 L) of annual renewable fuel use by 2022. Of this requirement, 21,000,000,000 US gal (7.9×1010 L) had to be advanced biofuels, defined as renewable fuels that reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 50%
DeleteGasoline containing up to 10% ethanol began a decades-long growth in the United States in the late 1970s. The demand for ethanol produced from field corn was spurred by the discovery that methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) was contaminating groundwater.[25][28] MTBE's use as an oxygenate additive was widespread due to mandates in the Clean Air Act amendments of 1992 to reduce carbon monoxide emissions. MTBE in gasoline had been banned in almost 20 states by 2006. Suppliers were concerned about potential litigation and a 2005 court decision denying legal protection for MTBE. MTBE's fall from grace opened a new market for ethanol, its primary substitute.[
Via Wikipedia.
You need to separate renewable fuel mandates, which are an import reduction measure grounded in politics, from oxygenate mandates, which are an environmental measure to minimize unburned hydrocarbons in the atmosphere. Fracking has eliminated the import substitution political rationale. The U.S. is now the leading exporter of petroleum and natural gas. The various Energy Acts mandating ethanol are now anachronisms.
DeleteETBE (ethyl tertiary butyl ether) is generally the preferred oxygenate technically and has not been associated with groundwater contamination. It also suppresses evaporation of gasoline, which is a major contributor to smog. It is one of five ethers - beyond MTBE - used in motor vehicle fuels. They all have advantages over alcohols, but their advantages (and thus usage) differ.
the fact reamins, Ethanol is REQUIRED in gasoline. In many jusrisdictions as a aoxygenatorr, but, as you correctly ointed out, not all.
DeleteSince you are being terribly (and asininely) pedantic here, you should also point out the fact that it is also used in gasoline as an octane enhancer and an anti-knock additive as well, enabling somewhat lesser blends of gasoline to be sold that still meet the standards of motor fuel.
Your initial premise was: "Ethanol is not "allowed" in fuel, but rather required by the EPA as it is an oxygenator."
DeleteIt is not "pedantic" to point out that ethanol is only required in gasoline as a renewable, but not as an oxygenator.
Ethanol is a weak octane enhancer and not cost effective in this role. Toluene and the ethers are far more effective and cost effective octane enhancers. Ethanol has a number of serious disadvantages, including hygroscopy, poor lubricity, and corrosiveness which the alternative oxygenators do not suffer.
Ethanol contains about 30% less energy per unit volume than gasoline, which means that an E10 blend of gasoline will have significantly lower energy content compared to pure gasoline. This requires more fuel usage per bhp produced, more fuel usage to achieve similar torque rise, and more emissions across the entire IC engine operating map as well. This defeats any supposed emissions improvement imparted by ethanol. E85 is an outright disaster, energy wise.
You need to become familiar with gasoline blends in Mexico, where corn ethanol is not required nor used in most markets. PEMEX produces motor vehicle fuels to maximize performance at the lowest cost. The Mexicans buy all our unused toluene to boost the octane of their fuels at a far lower price than ethanol.
You are correct about ethanol not being a great octane booster, Doesn't mean that that is not how it is used here in the US. Toluene (or Xylene) is much better, and was firt used in WWII to boost octane numbers. Sadly though, most cars do not use rubber componenets that are compatible with Tolune over long periods. What Mexico does has no bearing on this discussion, however.
DeleteI agree that Ethanol is a waste of time economically and emissions wise, but it IS required, and it IS an oxygenator, taking the palce of MTBE in our gasoline blends here is the US.
Why you are being an ass here I do not know.
While I agree, we have to pay the price, regardless if we want to eat... sigh
ReplyDeleteAt today's wheat price ($6.38/bushel), the farmer would receive about 7 cents for the wheat in an average loaf of bread. That's gross, not net profit. The vendors (delivery drivers) who stock the bread on the grocery store shelves make 10-25% of the retail price of each loaf. It's not uncommon for a Teamsters driver to take home $100k/year. The vendors who are self-employed (Brownberry, Pepperidge Farm, etc) can earn even more.
ReplyDeleteOther than when I eat chicken, beef or pork the only time "I" usually have corn is as a side with dinner, the occasional corn-on-the-cob or when I have tortilla chips.
ReplyDeleteWell, when I buy gas too... In July I bought 34.7 gal of 10% ethanol & 7.4 gal of 15% ... so about 4 gals of ethanol is what I bought in July.
I'm in WA state, the 15% was at a Pilot station that had good prices ($4.39), I didn't notice the purity until after I started pumping.
FWIW I saw $5.69 gas today.
When you ask a congress critter to do something the very first question they will have is "What's in it for me. How much money is it worth for me?" And the answer to that determines what happens next. NOT what is rational or right.
ReplyDeleteThe candidate who can say "I sponsored legislation to significantly lower the price of the most expensive items in your grocery cart" is more likely to be re-elected than the one who says "I voted to keep the price of hamburger at $6 a pound.
DeleteHis message will be drowned by the messaging of the lobbyist supported candidate. I don't want to rehash campaign spending arguments. Our government is beholden to special interest groups. The legislature hasn't worked for America in a very long time. That's why Trump was elected three times, Joe public knows when he's getting screwed and the rank and file citizens are over it. Done. The Republicans are going to be hard pressed to hold on to the legislature this fall because of the lack of performance.
DeleteFor Fred! And you (or anyone else) think the Democrats or Democrat Socialists are going to do better, exactly why?
DeleteThe corn used to make ethanol is not the same as used for human consumption nor feedstock.
ReplyDeleteNot all proteins and carbs are interchangeable.
The adjustment you suggest government making, would need to be made in the preceeding year for impact the following year, and smacks of centralized government production. I know you don't want centralized government control of food production.
A far far better way for the gov to positively influence food prices is to STOP FUCKING AROUND IN FAR CORNERS OF THE GLOBE!
But I'd digress...
No, really, a Yuuuuge part of the upcoming funtimes, is due to fertilizer issues related to the gulf. While not water-related, it is a variable in the equation. Areas with poorer soil but better moisture could be made productive with Anfo.
Looks like I'll be expanding my little winter wheat "pancake patch" again. Still have most of a 5 gallon bucket of wheat berries from last year's harvest.
ReplyDeleteI'm an inefficient thresher but the chickens LOVE threshing days. So, I suppose I get some of it back in eggs and roasters.
Note to self, get an extra spare set of stones for the grinder.
Michael the anonymous
Michael - Now that I seem to have a little space, Winter grain will be a bit more in earnest. Not that I really get much from it, but it sure brings me a lot of joy.
DeleteThe Joy of trying new things in the Garden keeps me trying.
DeleteMy wife sometimes muses about dirty hands but when I gave her a cup of NH grown organic coffee she was chuckling.
I actually started my pancake patch because I had a dear friend who loved real homemade pasta but was "allergic" to gluten. Turns out she was allergic to Roundup they use to speed dry down of the wheat crop for harvesting.
Plain organic wheat from my garden has yet to trigger her "allergies" to gluten, over the years.
Pretty sure there won't be any long term national solutions regarding food and fuel. We need to be free of the constraints of "experts" that wrote that sht that B anon 11;44pm mentions.
ReplyDeleteHowever, if just one state were to "protect" its citizens from federal prosecution for providing ethanol-free gasoline for public markets, a scientific baseline would be created.
Measure it, test it and see how many ways are better than the current one-size-fits-all national scam.
Or, test everything, keep what is good, do not place your trust in "experts".
Milton
When I worked on oxygenated fuels for Oxirane, then ARCO, I do remember mandated ethanol to increase fuel reserves. As stated ethanol does not add much energy to the mix. It did burn cleanly which was the EPA's secondary point and ethanol was cheap and available domestically. Methanol was also proposed but gives even less energy for the same mass and caused problems with tubing. ARCO found that out after building the world's largest methanol plant.
ReplyDeleteOxirane made Tertiary Butyl Alcohol or TBA as an oxidizer in plants in Spain, Netherland, Japan and the US. They sold every drop they could produced as it burned cleanly and added more energy than methanol or ethanol.
If you want to go down another wormhole, check the price of milk per hundredweight the farmer gets versus the price of milk to the consumer. Farmers get less but the price here went up a dollar a gallon.
My RV got 8 mpg on 10% gas and 10 mpg on pure gas. Pure gas was harder to find and most places way more money.
ReplyDeleteWhen all gas started including ethanol I noted an approximate 10% reduction in average mpg 2002 Ford Taurus: 24mpg to 22mpg for the same weekly trips. I was keeping records prior to and post the change (2005IIRRC), and subsequently ran some.tanks on 90 octane recreational (nonethanol) gas to ensure it was not aging of the car to blame...back to 24mpg with those tanks.
Delete10% increase in CO2 emissions....tell me how that helped, if CO2 is the problem.
Differ
True honest accounting shows that corn ethanol is a net loss vis-a-vis fossil fuels. More fuel is burned to raise the crop, harvest it, dry it, transport it, manufacture the alcohol, then transport it again, than it produces in BTU's.
ReplyDeleteBut we already built 200 corn ethanol plants out of irrational exuberance, so there's no going back.