http://www.aglinenews.com

" I heard it
through the
AgLine"

 

March 25, 2011

 

 

·        Radioactivity spreads to Tokyo vegetables

·        Wheat at the heart of Middle East turmoil

·        Recent rulings are a big boon to GM crops

·        Walmart joins to help C. America farmers

·        New Ag Conference & Expo reset for Greece

 

 

Radioactivity spreads to Tokyo vegetables

 

TOKYO, Japan (ENS) - Radiation above the legal limit has been detected in a vegetable grown in Tokyo, Japan's health ministry said today. This is the first time that elevated levels of radioactive cesium have been found in a Tokyo vegetable since the damaged Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant began spewing radioactivity into Japan's air, water and soil.

 

The nuclear plant operated by Tokyo Electric Power was damaged during the 9.0 magnitude earthquake and tsunami on March 11. Loss of power to the plant and failure of emergency backup generators caused loss of cooling water to the nuclear fuel in four of the plant's six reactors. Several explosions of radioactive hydrogen gas and two fires in spent fuel pools released radiation over a wide area.

 

The health ministry says radioactive cesium was detected in a leafy vegetable called komatsuna, or mustard spinach, sampled from a research field in Edogawa ward on Wednesday. The contaminated vegetable is not for sale in markets.

 

The health ministry says that level of radioactivity would not have an adverse effect on health, even if the vegetable was eaten.

 

Tokyo Metropolitan Government has lifted its advice against giving tap water to infants in Tokyo's 23 wards and 5 adjacent cities. The advisory was issued after levels of radioactive iodine-131 above the legal limit were detected at a water purification facility in northern Tokyo on Tuesday and Wednesday.

 

The government said the level has been falling for the past three days. On Thursday the level fell to 79 becquerels per liter, below the recommended limit of 100 for babies younger than 12 months.

 

On Friday, the Metro government will conduct further testing at the plant and distribute 240,000 bottles of water to households with infants, after a similar distribution on Thursday.

 

But the good news is limited to Tokyo. Radioactive water has been detected at water purification facilities in five other prefectures.

 

The level of radioactive iodine-131 at 18 purification plants exceeds Japan's safety limit for infants.

 

The governments of Fukushima, Ibaraki, Chiba, Saitama and Tochigi prefectures have detected more than 100 becquerels of iodine per liter of water, above the safety level for infants under 12 months.

 

The water is considered to be safe for adults to drink because it is lower than the adult safety limit of 300 becquerel per liter.

 

Of the 11 varieties of vegetables and also milk sampled from March 16 to 22 in in the Fukushima and Ibaraki prefectures, iodine-131 and caesium-137 levels exceeded limits set for food and drink ingestion, the International Atomic Energy Agency said.

 

Scientists say the radioactivity was blown by the wind from the damaged Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant to surrounding areas, and then washed down into rivers by rain.

 

Hosei University professor and air-borne contamination expert Kentaro Murano told NHK TV that it is difficult to predict where the radioactive substances will spread, because the wind blows in various directions at this time of year.

 

Murano cautioned against overreaction to small changes in radioactive levels. If it rains several times, he said, all radioactive substances in the air and on the ground will be washed out to sea.

 

Professor Murano said radioactivity in the water will decrease to safer levels within two weeks. But if more radioactive substances are released from the nuclear plant, the impact of the radioactive contamination of the surrounding area will continue.

 

Workers at Tokyo Electric Power's damaged Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant have made progress over the past 24 hours in providing a more conventional way of injecting water into the Unit 1 reactor core, and into the Unit 3 spent fuel pool.

 

The lights are back on in the Unit 3 control room, and crews are moving towards regaining control over the cooling of the three reactor cores and the spent fuel pools on Units 1, 2, 3 and 4.

 

Workers returned after being evacuated from Units 3 and 4 on March 23, following black smoke emissions from Unit 3.

 

Crews are now using normal systems to inject water to cool the reactors, whereas they have been using cement pumping trucks, fire engines and helicopters to inject water.

 

Reactor pressure is increasing in Unit 1, pressure readings are unreliable in Unit 2, and stable in Unit 3 as water continues to be injected through their feed-water pipes.

 

"At this moment, we do not consider any reactor coolant leakage inside the [Unit 4] reactor containment vessel happened," Tokyo Electric said today.

 

Progress also has been made in re-establishing external power to all six reactor units, although workers must still extend that power to all the components on the units that need to be repowered.

 

On Units 5 and 6 spent fuel pools now have the normal systems that remove water, cool the water and then return that cooled water to either the reactor core or the spent fuel pools.

 

The workers who are trying to bring the damaged power plant under control are showing "immense courage" said IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano.

 

Two workers at the site were injured this week, in addition to the 11 other workers injured since the disaster began.

 

At 10 pm on March 22, a worker setting up a temporary power panel in the common spent nuclear fuel pool was injured. Three hours later another worker on that same temporary power panel job was injured. Both were transported to TEPCO's Fukushima Daini Nuclear Power Station 11.7 km (seven miles) away where the industrial doctor is.

 

Today, three workers from other companies who were in charge of cable laying work in reactor Unit 3 were exposed to the radiation dose above the legal limit. Two of them were taken to Fukushima Medical University Hospital as it was confirmed that their legs were contaminated.

 

Japan's science ministry says levels of radioactive substances up to twice recommended limits were detected in ocean waters 30 kilometers (20 miles) away from the quake-damaged Fukushima nuclear plant.

 

The ministry Wednesday surveyed eight locations over a distance of 70 kilometers (45 miles) from north to south in the Pacific Ocean. Radioactive iodine-131 and radioactive cesium-137 were measured at all eight locations.

 

A consultant at the Marine Ecology Research Institute, Jun Misonoo, told NHK TV that contamination decreases further off the coast. He said radioactive iodine-131 levels have a half-life of eight days, and the impact on fish fades away.

 

Return to Top

 

 

Wheat at the heart of Middle East turmoil

 

(The New York Times) – Underlying the wave of unrest across North Africa and the Middle East is the fact that some of the cries for democracy are coming from mouths in need of food. Media outlets around the world were quick to make the link between food and the protests in Egypt, Tunisia and Algeria, pointing to one specific grain: wheat.

 

Egypt is the largest importer of wheat in the world, with Algeria not far behind. Together, they import more of the grain than all of South America. Even Pharaoh Ramses III's tomb was found with engravings depicting his royal bakery.

 

Recent fluctuations in wheat supply, some of which appear to be climate-driven, registered most sharply in the Middle East. In just the past year, natural disasters in Russia, Argentina and Australia choked global supply, pushing some governments to halt exports (Climatewire, Jan. 13). Earlier this month, the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) released a rare warning that droughts in China would seriously imperil wheat supplies, although recent rains may have lessened the damage.

 

Wheat production is predicted to rise by 3.4 percent this year, according to FAO, as strong prices encouraged farmers to plant more of the crop. Nevertheless, the increases are patchy, with heavily wheat-dependent countries like Tunisia suffering yield losses. High international prices mean poor countries will still be emptying their pockets for wheat, even if they are producing more and importing less.

 

"Wheat tends to trigger a lot of events in the Middle East," said Shenggen Fan, director-general of the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).

 

Globally, no other grain has a connection to livelihood like wheat. With a consumption rate of 661 million tons per year, it easily bypasses rice and maize as the most important food crop in the world. It provides one-fifth of the world's calories, on par with rice, and has the power to instill anxiety in political leaders, market experts, farmers and -- as seen in Cairo's Tahrir Square -- working people.

 

And it's just a preview of what's likely to come, according to food security experts.

 

Population and temperatures rise, but wheat barely moves

 

Running in a race with a climate change, population growth is projected to rise up to 9 billion by 2050. In that same period, temperatures are predicted to rise 2 to 4 degrees Celsius and radically affect growing patterns. Last month, U.S. Wheat Associates, a trade association for the industry, recommended that the global wheat trade double to 250 million metric tons annually by 2050.

 

"Global wheat production is increasing at only 0.9 percent each year," said Hans-Joachim Braun, director of the Mexico-based International Maize and Wheat Center's (CIMMYT) Global Wheat Program, in a statement last year. "This is a very critical issue as global demand is growing at 1.5 percent or more annually. Combined with the impacts of climate change, we must avoid the risk of another food crisis and ensure farmers across the world are equipped to meet the demands of a rising world population."

 

While an increase in atmospheric CO2 could stimulate growth for a carbon-loving plant like wheat, the benefits only accrue if water availability and temperature remain the same -- which they won't, according to climate models.

 

Wheat is also a difficult grain to perfect. Scientists struggle to figure out how to make it grow more vigorously, survive drier climates and fight off invasive pests and diseases, but the end product must also maintain a high level of quality for what the market wants, such as fluffy rolls or long-lasting dry pasta. An increasingly unreliable climate simply adds to their headache.

 

One more exacerbating flaw is the crop's low level of genetic diversity. It limits the options of varieties that are more resistant to droughts, heat, molds and other threats posed by climate change.

 

Not a 'sexy' investment

 

Its almost-exclusive role as food for humans makes it a less attractive investment.

 

"Wheat isn't sexy," said Mike Miller, a Washington state wheat farmer and commissioner for the Washington Grain Commission. "Corn is sexy because it has many more values," like feedstock and biofuels.

 

For decades, wheat was regarded as a weed among the blossoming priorities of private agribusiness, compared to moneymakers like corn and soybeans. About 78 percent of wheat varieties were developed by universities through public grants, said Jorge Dubcovsky, an agronomist at the University of California, Davis. It was simply not lucrative enough for the private sector.

 

Seed companies make the most money off hybrid varieties, a sort of mule of the plant world. Like the mule, a hardworking donkey-horse combination, a hybrid seed displays the best combination of its parents' genetic qualities. Its drawback is that it is sterile and cannot reproduce.

 

Unlike corn and soybeans, most wheat varieties are not hybrids. This means that farmers don't need to buy new seed every year, a lost market for seed companies. The drive for wheat research was motivated by food security efforts, said Dubcovsky, not necessarily by higher profit margins.

 

Last year, the U.S. Department of Agriculture allotted about $60 million to wheat research. "[It] might sound large, but it pales in comparison to what the private industry is putting into corn and soybeans, almost on a daily basis," said Jane DeMarchi, director of government affairs for research and technology at the National Association of Wheat Growers.

 

The relative lack of interest from private companies left wheat farmers wanting attention. Two and a half years ago, the wheat industry mobilized and began approaching technology providers. "In 2008, growers were very active in soliciting investment from private companies," said DeMarchi. "The dynamics of investment are changing."

 

Monsanto, the world's biggest seed company, flirted with wheat genetics in the late 1990s, looking to add to its line of Roundup Ready crops. The company abandoned its efforts in 2004, due to a dismal outlook for profits.

 

A few years later, a turnaround occurred. Wheat markets were on the upswing, and growers began pushing heavily for more private investment in research. In 2009, Monsanto bought WestBred, a small grain biotechnology research firm out of Bozeman, Mont. With the merger, Monsanto acquired WestBred's germplasm -- a collection of genetic resources -- and gave itself five to seven years to develop new varieties of drought-tolerant and high-yielding wheat.

 

More public-private partnerships

 

Recently, private companies have carved out a role in the campaign for global sustainability. At the most recent World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, a public-private strategy headed by 17 major corporations was launched to boost crop yields, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and cut poverty by 20 percent each in the next decade (Climatewire, Jan. 31).

 

Last year saw a growth of partnerships between private companies, federal agencies, land-grant universities and organizations. Swiss agribusiness company Syngenta formed a partnership with wheat research institution CIMMYT, seeking to develop both cutting-edge technology and traditional methods accessible to poor farmers in developing countries.

 

Monsanto announced plans to collaborate with Kansas State University and Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University on wheat research. NAWG adopted an official policy to prioritize collaboration between organizations, universities and private companies.

 

"There's no question that the private sector has an increasingly important role in investing in agriculture, simply because governments and other public institutions can no longer afford to," said Brian Halweil, a senior fellow at the Worldwatch Institute, an organization promoting sustainability in international agriculture. "The big question is whether private entities will have the public interest as part of its mission."

 

While developing new seed varieties is a lucrative proposition for companies, there has been little investment in rebuilding soils, maintaining aquifers or low-cost irrigation, said Halweil.

 

Profits first, then global good

 

Halweil suggests that the public sector encourage companies with tax incentives or stockholder pressure to account for their green promises. "There is clearly potential for private-public partnerships that include private firms sharing expertise, genetic material, staff and more in the pursuit of public goods," said Halweil. But "this is the exception rather than the norm right now."

 

But even those who champion traditional breeding say that partnerships through the industrial agricultural system are the best way to reach the most people, and that private research priorities can go hand in hand with public needs.

 

Nina Fedoroff, a biology professor at Pennsylvania State University and biotechnology expert, said that private companies possess the capital to develop high-yielding varieties, crucial to ensuring a secure food supply.

 

"There, we need to focus on regulatory reform," she said, in response to concerns about private interests' focus on profits, not necessarily on the global good.

 

"Most of the world's food is produced through that system," said Cary Fowler, executive director of the Global Crop Diversity Trust, an organization that seeks to promote and ensure plant biodiversity. "We have to be a little bit nuanced."

 

Return to Top

 

 

Recent rulings a big boon to GM crops

 

(The Washington Post) – At the supermarket, most shoppers are oblivious to a battle raging within U.S. agriculture and the Obama administration’s role in it. Two thriving but opposing sectors — organics and genetically engineered crops — have been warring on the farm, in the courts and in Washington.

 

Organic growers say that, without safeguards, their foods will be contaminated by genetically modified crops growing nearby. The genetic engineering industry argues that its way of farming is safe and should not be restricted in order to protect organic competitors.

 

Into that conflict comes Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, who for two years has been promising something revolutionary: finding a way for organic farms to coexist alongside the modified plants.

 

But in recent weeks, the administration has announced a trio of decisions that have clouded the future of organics and boosted the position of genetically engineered (GE) crops. Vilsack approved genetically modified alfalfa and a modified corn to be made into ethanol, and he gave limited approval to GE sugar beets.

 

The announcements were applauded by GE industry executives, who describe their genetically modified organisms as the farming of the future. But organics supporters were furious, saying their hopes that the Obama administration would protect their interests were dashed.

 

“It was boom, boom boom,” said Walter Robb, co-chief executive of Whole Foods Markets, a major player in organics. “These were deeply disappointing. They were such one-sided decisions.”

 

To a growing cadre of consumers who pay attention to how their food is produced, the agriculture wars are nothing short of operatic, pitting technology against tradition in a struggle underscored by politics and profits.

 

“Each side is so passionate,” Vilsack said in a recent interview. “And each side is convinced that it’s right.”

 

The two sides are not clashing over the ethics or safety of genetic engineering, in which plants are modified in the laboratory with genes from another organism to make them more pest-resistant or to produce other traits. Instead, the argument is over the potential for contamination: pollen and seeds from GE crops can drift across fields to nearby organic plants. That has triggered fears that organic crops could be overtaken by modified crops. Contamination can cost organic growers — some overseas markets, for example, have rejected organic products when tests showed they carried even trace amounts of GE material.

 

Organics supporters also say that, as the number of genetically engineered crops grows, so does the risk. And some conventional farmers who don’t use GE seeds are also concerned about their crops. USDA has approved 81 GE crops — it has never denied a proposal — and 22 applications are pending.

 

“It’s really about the right to farm and the right to choose,” Robb said. “You shouldn’t farm in a way that affects the way others farm.”

 

But the GE industry counters that farmers should be free to grow the crops because they do not harm other plants. GE boosters say it is the best way to feed a growing global population because farmers can raise more food and use fewer pesticides and less fertilizer.

 

“Biotechnology can help crops thrive in drought-prone areas, improve the nutrition content of foods, grow alternative energy sources and improve the lives of farmers and rural communities around the globe,” Jim Greenwood, head of Biotechnology Industry Organization, said this year.

 

Some recent studies, however, suggest that the proliferation of GE crops and the pesticide used on them has led to the development of “super weeds” resistant to that pesticide.

 

Since GE crops debuted in 1992, they have been embraced by many U.S. farmers. The vast majority of soy, corn, cotton and canola seed is genetically engineered. Although GE sugar beets were temporarily taken out of production by a court ruling, they had captured 95 percent of the market.

 

Foods made from GE crops are not labeled, but the typical American consumes them regularly because most processed products contain ingredients made from modified soy, corn, canola and sugar beets.

 

Organic agriculture, meanwhile, has also been expanding. Although organics represent just 3.7 percent of the food sold in this country, sales of food and personal care products reached $26.6 billion in 2009, according to the Organic Trade Association.

 

To meet the legal definition of organic, crops must be raised without chemical pesticides and fertilizers, irradiation or genetic modification.

 

Vilsack has said organics can help struggling small farms stay afloat. But he has also long supported genetic engineering — the industry named him “Governor of the Year” when he was Iowa’s chief executive. “I see both sides,” he said.

 

Vilsack arrived at the USDA to find the regulations on genetically modified foods outdated and the issue tangled in litigation.

 

In December, he called an unusual summit between the sides. He said the USDA had finished a court-ordered study of the environmental impact of GE alfalfa and faced a choice: granting unconditional approval to the crop, or approving it with restrictions, such as buffer zones between farms. The GE companies and farming groups argued against limitations, saying that the USDA was overstepping its authority.

 

Vilsack’s effort was slammed by Republican lawmakers and conservative publications. On Jan. 19, congressional Republicans told Vilsack that the idea of restricting GE alfalfa was “troubling.” And on Jan. 20, Vilsack heard more of the same from the House agriculture committee.

 

During the three weeks that followed, Vilsack announced approval of GE alfalfa, sugar beets and corn.

 

Organics supporters were shocked. They had fully expected Vilsack to require some limitations on GE alfalfa.

 

“Vilsack was very serious about the [coexistence] option, and people involved thought it was a done deal,” said Andrew Kimbrell of the Center for Food Safety. “Then Vilsack is called to the White House for questioning.”

 

Vilsack confirmed that he attended White House meetings. But, he said, ultimately regulations prevented him from restricting GE crops. Under the 24-year-old rules, the USDA can set limits only if the GE plant harms other plants. The agency has little authority to consider, for example, whether a GE crop poses economic harm to an organic crop.

 

If Vilsack had been hoping to restrict GE crops, the timing could not have been worse. Republicans had just won control of the House, and several farm-state members were adamantly opposed to any restrictions on GE crops. Obama was trying to bolster his credentials as being business-friendly and promising to reduce unnecessary regulation. The administration already had been pushing trade partners for greater acceptance of GE seeds.

 

The GE industry is declaring victory for the time being, but the wars have not dissipated.

 

Monsanto has sued the government for not fully deregulating GE sugar beets. The Center for Food Safety is again suing the USDA to stop the planting of GE alfalfa and sugar beets.

 

Critics of genetic engineering refer to a 2000 incident in which a GE corn meant for animal feed infiltrated tortillas, corn chips and other foods. More than 300 foods were recalled, and farmers were awarded a $110 million settlement for lost income.

 

Syngenta, maker of the GE corn to be used for ethanol, has said it will reduce risk of contamination by requiring farmers to grow the crop near ethanol plants and sell only to those plants, among other measures.

 

Sharon Bomer, an executive vice president at Biotechnology Industry Organization, said “there is deep appreciation” in the GE industry for the need to minimize the spread of the crops. She said organic farmers must protect their crops. “The burden is on them,” she said.

 

But GE critics are not satisfied. “To say ‘just trust me’ is rather absurd when we’re talking about profit-related companies,” said George Siemon, chief executive of Organic Valley, a major organic farmers’ cooperative.

 

Vilsack said “co-existence” is not dead, and he intends to push on.

 

“I had no expectation that the dialogue was going to end in some grand understanding or a kumbaya moment,” he said. “This is going to require a lot of work by reasonable, smart people to get this done. It’s in the interest of the country for these folks to stop fighting and get together and figure out how to live in the same neighborhood.”

 

Return to Top

 

 

Walmart joins to help C. America farmers

 

(USAID via Medical News Today) – USAID and Walmart signed an agreement on March 14 to support small rural farmers in Central America and to connect them to the retailer's regional and international supply chains.

 

The new partnership links Feed the Future, the U.S. government's global hunger and food security initiative, with Walmart's Global Sustainable Agriculture Goals. Small rural farmers in Central America will earn more from their fresh fruit and vegetable production, which will help them climb out of poverty. Consumers will benefit from greater access to locally-grown produce.

 

"Public-private partnerships like this one are crucial to USAID's long-term food security and job creation objectives in Central America. Through these alliances, USAID leverages its resources; our private sector partners meet core business goals; and the rural poor improve their livelihoods" said Mark Feierstein, USAID's Assistant Administrator in the Bureau for Latin America and the Caribbean.

 

Feierstein and Walmart's Executive Vice President for Corporate Affairs, Leslie Dach, signed the Memorandum of Understanding formalizing the partnership.

 

Walmart's Global Sustainable Agriculture Goals were announced in October 2010 and focus on three broad areas - supporting farmers and their communities, producing more food with less waste, and sustainably sourcing key agricultural products.

 

"Our commitment to the 'live better' part of our mission means that we use the size and scale of our business to make a difference on important social issues like food security and agricultural development," said Eduardo Solorzano, president and CEO of Walmart Latinoamerica. "This partnership with the USAID allows us to broaden and accelerate our commitment to help small rural farmers in Central America lead a better life while also bringing our customers more affordable and higher quality food."

 

The USAID-Walmart regional agreement builds on experience gained from previous collaborations in Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and El Salvador. One of the lessons learned is that formal relationships between the suppliers and the corporate buyers provide the long-term perspective necessary to ensure the sustainability of the program. Another is that small farmers benefit greatly when buyers explain their quality and quantity standards and share their production calendars.

 

The funding for the three-year agreement comes from USAID, Walmart, the Walmart Foundation, NGO partners, national governments, and other private sector partners.

 

Return to Top

 

 

New Ag Conference & Expo reset for Greece

 

The team at New Ag International Conference & Exhibition is back on track and rescheduled for June 28-30 at the Intercontinental Hotel in Athens, Greece.

 

Political unrest in Egypt at the end of January forced the New Ag team to make new arrangements.

 

Already nearly 350 people representing 180 companies from more than 45 countries have reconfirmed their plans to be in attendance. More attendees are expected to be added to the list in the coming weeks. Registration forms are available at: newaginternational.com/athens/athens.html

 

The 9th edition of this prestigious event is sponsored by seven of the world’s industry leaders in specialty agriculture. The companies include: Brandt (USA), Haifa Chemicals (Israel, Humintech (Germany), Phytothreptiki (Greece), Sustainable Agro-Solutions (Spain), SQM (Chile), Valagro (Italy)

The event is officially supported by the International Biocontrol Manufacturers Association (IBMA)

 

Industry-leading speakers from the USA, Canada, Iran and India will discuss sprinkler technology, foliar nutrition, fertigation, best cropping practices under saline conditions and global business opportunities offered by biological control products.

 

The final conference program is expected to be announced soon. So far, 25 of the 29 papers selected for Cairo will be delivered in Athens. The provisional program may be downloaded at: http://www.newaginternational.com

 

Most of the exhibitors who booked for Cairo have rebooked for Athens. The list of exhibitors may be viewed and downloaded at the New Ag web site. One exhibition stand is still available. Interested parties should immediately contact New Ag at: newaag@newaginternational

 

Finally, the New Ag team offers delegates a word of caution. Use the forms provided by New Ag International Conference & Exhibition when making hotel reservations and ignore any offers from third parties. Using a third party would likely result in your credit card being debited, but no room at the conference hotel. Should you be contacted by a third party, please notify the New Ag team at: newag@newaginternational.com

 

Please check the New Ag web site for the latest information and updates as the time for the event draws near.

 

Return to Top

 

 

End Transmission