Food Riots

And like usual Lori is clueless,
Wanna bet which way corn production is going you dumbass salesman???

Top.... you have to look at grain production on the whole vs. increase in demand for grain on the whole. Despite record production of grain, demand outweighed supply. There is only so much land available for production... barring deforestation. The problem lies in the amount of grain being used for ethanol. As Dave mentioned, ethanol is not the way to go.... especially grain based. If they can get cellulosic ethanol on-line efficiently, then great. But bottom line is that we need to cease using grain for ethanol production.
 
Am I the only one who sees this as a good step in riddign ourselves dependent on foreign oil? Even if ethanol proves to be just as effective, keeping (US) jobs and creatign a domestic dependency is still very good.

While it certainly provides a wake up call and will help push us in that direction, if you do so at the expense of others being able to eat... then no, it is not the way to go.
 
Seriously, are you still ashamed to state your college.
Signifiacantly higher prices especially in a simple industry like farming will always raise production. The shortages are temporary, investors see the lagging ag sector compared to oil and minerals and are making wise investments in ag going up. Guess where I'm investing next?

While I agree grain prices will continue to rise and thus Aggs are a good place to invest, you are kidding yourself if you think they can wave a magic wand and suddenly produce more grain..... especially given the fact that demand continues to skyrocket. We cannot keep pace unless we do one of two things in the short run....

1) Cut down forests so that we have more land to farm

2) Cease using grain for ethanol production.
 
While I agree grain prices will continue to rise and thus Aggs are a good place to invest, you are kidding yourself if you think they can wave a magic wand and suddenly produce more grain..... especially given the fact that demand continues to skyrocket. We cannot keep pace unless we do one of two things in the short run....

1) Cut down forests so that we have more land to farm

2) Cease using grain for ethanol production.
Or 3, bring back the small family farm.
 
An increase in supplies to offset what's being produced for fuel is all we need to do long term. Short term, I fully support my tax dollars going to give relief to the people in need.

I'm not well versed in alternative energy sources, so I have no opinion of synthetic alternatives or what the advantages or disadvantages will be. Honestly I'd feel more comfortable with just producing more food. We know that more food supplies will stop this. What's the hinderance in simply producing more?

Who knows what kind of nuclear sister people would come up with.

Cellulosic Ethanol production is done by using things like corn stover, switchgrass, woodchips etc... to produce ethanol. It is not as easy as using grain, but it is done using non-food items.

The hinderance to producing more is available land is not abundant enough to keep up with demand. China and India alone will increase demand to the point of this continuing to be a problem. Because BOTH are seeing increases in human consumption as well as ethanol production.

The other problem with ethanol is that it takes more energy to make it than the end product produces. It is a net loser in energy at this time.
 
freak you have a compulsive need to stand up for the economic illiterate.
Please don't embarass yourself further, I mention Iowa and corn and the early primary making your point useless.
Also, do not be foolish enough to bet me wheat production won't go way up following a huge increase in price.
 
freak you have a compulsive need to stand up for the economic illiterate.
Please don't embarass yourself further, I mention Iowa and corn and the early primary making your point useless.
Also, do not be foolish enough to bet me wheat production won't go way up following a huge increase in price.

Top.... as I said, I too think production will increase along with prices. The problem top is that DEMAND is also increasing and will ALSO continue to increase. Here is a tip from Captain Obvious... they do not make land anymore. Which is why countries like Brazil are cutting down forests to produce more farm land.

Side note... I have been invested in Aggs for several years. This was inevitable given the complete ignorance of those who think we can simply wave a wand and produce however much grain we want.

Here is a little food for thought toppy.... It takes six pounds of grain for every pound of beef consumed in the world. As China continues to urbanize and gain wealth, it is consuming more and more beef. It became a net importer of grain for the first time last year and is expected to be an even bigger importer this year. They do not have any more land to farm top.
 
freak you have a compulsive need to stand up for the economic illiterate.
Please don't embarass yourself further, I mention Iowa and corn and the early primary making your point useless.
Also, do not be foolish enough to bet me wheat production won't go way up following a huge increase in price.

Side note... what the hell does a primary have to do with worldwide grain production? Not to mention ONE state. Here is another piece of info for you toppy.... Iowa is not the sole producer of grain in the world.
 
dude we produce a fuel that's actually efficient, I know all about the waiste in ethanol.
Oncelor was trying to argue production wouldn't go up with price.
Not sure China is out of farmland, they have way more land unoccupied than they have lived in. They are pretty smart and will figure out how to increase production.
 
How much grain is used to feed cattle as compared to how much grain is used in ethanol production? What is the energy return on each? General environmental impact of each?

Further, given the biofuels actually serve to compliment fossil fuels that are key to food production, what is the positive impact of biofuels on the productions costs as compared to the increase demand caused by biofuel production?

I don't think biofules are the big boogeyman here.

Having said that. This is indeed problematic, at least for Bangladeshis and other poor folks, not the American fat cats with their fancy color TVs:

Blog_World_Bank_Food_Prices.gif
 
dude we produce a fuel that's actually efficient, I know all about the waiste in ethanol.
Oncelor was trying to argue production wouldn't go up with price.
Not sure China is out of farmland, they have way more land unoccupied than they have lived in. They are pretty smart and will figure out how to increase production.

Really top? If they are so smart they can figure it out.... why is it they became a net importer? The Chinese are well known for their long term thinking. They have seen this coming for a long time. As have we. Yet they still saw demand outpace their supply.

Yes, in the future they will continue to expand their infrastructure and that may allow for more of their land to be farmed. But again, you have to realize that it is the pace of increased production compared to increased demand that matters. I do think production will continue to increase.... just not fast enough to keep up with demand.
 
How much grain is used to feed cattle as compared to how much grain is used in ethanol production? What is the energy return on each? General environmental impact of each?

Further, given the biofuels actually serve to compliment fossil fuels that are key to food production, what is the positive impact of biofuels on the productions costs as compared to the increase demand caused by biofuel production?

I don't think biofules are the big boogeyman here.

Having said that. This is indeed problematic, at least for Bangladeshis and other poor folks, not the American fat cats with their fancy color TVs:

Blog_World_Bank_Food_Prices.gif


I do not know the answer to how much grain is used to produce ethanol. From what I have read it takes approximately six pounds of grain to produce a pound of beef. It is also my understanding that ethanol currently takes more energy to produce than the end product produces. Thus it is a net loser in energy.... thus on that merit alone we should discontinue.

here is an interesting site.... note.... I just saw it and have not looked to closely at it, thus take with a grain of salt

http://www.ncga.com/worldofcorn/2007/production1.asp
 
Last edited:
I don't dissagree, our farmers are some of the best in the world. It will help our trade imbalance if we can export way more food to china.
 
Dung.... agg secretary just stated that about 15% of our corn goes into ethanol production.... and we are the largest producer of corn in the world.
 
Back
Top