|
|
 |
" 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