 |
|||
 |
" I heard it |
||
October 28, 2009
· Horny hemp? Check out, ‘The Botany of Desire’
· Climate legislation: Boon or bust for farmers?
· Science, agriculture debate global food needs
· Bayer Ag crop unit posts loss; sticks to forecast
· IPhone application calculates spray tank mixes
Horny hemp? Check out, ‘The Botany of Desire’
(Bloomberg) Does hemp get horny?
Apparently it does, according to “The Botany of Desire,” a
fascinating nature program airing tonight on PBS at 8 p.m.
The show examines the relationship between humans and marijuana, tulips, apples and potatoes. While we might think we’re in command, host Michael Pollan makes a good case that these supposedly passive partners seduce us into doing their bidding by appealing to our desires for intoxication, beauty, sweetness and control.
“They’ve been using us,” says Pollan, who has written extensively on agriculture, food and gardening. The program is based on his book, “The Botany of Desire: A Plant’s Eye View of the World.”
Apples originated in
Bears ate the sweetest apples and excreted their seeds in
ever-expanding areas. Humans eventually took a bite and were hooked, exporting
apples down the Silk Road to Europe and later
The Appleseed saga underscores the love-hate nature of these relationships, Pollan explains. It wasn’t long before Americans started using apples to make hard cider, the go-to drink for children and presidents alike. John Adams started his day with a couple of belts and by the 1830s chronic cider intoxication had become a national menace.
Tulip Mania
Suddenly apples were seen as evil, but it was too late. They had used humans to get out in the world and left them with a hangover. Pretty smart for a dumb piece of fruit.
Tulips, which also originated in
During the tulip mania of the 1630s, some Dutch investors paid what amounted to $10 million to $15 million in today’s currency for a single bulb, Pollan says. Like all investment bubbles this one finally burst, unleashing a wave of tulip hatred symbolized by a mad professor who roamed the streets with a stick, beating the blossoms to shreds.
Yet the love of tulips, and other flowers, is very much with
us today, symbolized by the Aalsmeer Flower Market
near
Drug War
The program’s section on marijuana reminds us that plants with intoxicating qualities will always find suitors, even though the road can lead to prison.
It wasn’t always that way. In the 1800s Americans legally used cannabis to treat labor pain, asthma and rheumatism. Eventually the war on drugs drove growers indoors, where they created a strain of pot with a mind of its own. One planter, whose identity is withheld, says that when his partner is gone for a few days, “the plants know it” and they “don’t do as well.” I guess even weed gets the blues.
Pollan is a thoughtful and engaging host, often reminding us that plants really don’t have minds or agendas. It just seems that way.
Like humans, plants can experience a romantic rising of the
sap. When male plants are removed from the growing area “sexually frustrated”
female plants excrete large amounts of resin, apparently in the hope of
attracting male spores. The final segment features potatoes, first cultivated
in the
French Fries
The Irish developed a dependency on one type of potato -- the Lumper -- that was wiped out by an airborne blight in 1845. One in eight citizens died as a result.
We are creating a similar “monoculture,” the documentary warns, because of our French fry infatuation. Americans consume 7.5 billion pounds a year, many of which are produced from the Russet Burbank.
The show stresses the importance of diversifying the crop and the health benefits of organic farming. There’s little doubt who will have the last laugh. One reasonably assumes tulips will be dancing in the sun long after the human race has converted itself to fertilizer.
Climate legislation: Boon or bust for farmers?
(Morningstar.com
via Yahoo! Finance) – The
n our assessment, there are two key components to the cap-and-trade math as it pertains to agricultural producers. Where these two ultimately net out will determine the answer to our question.
The first is the degree to which a carbon regime serves to
increase energy costs. By placing a limit on
The second piece of the equation is the degree to which
So where will this math net out? While answers vary widely, the one certainty is that there is a great deal of uncertainty surrounding the net effect a climate bill might have on the farm.
In the cap-and-trade corner, there is the EPA (amongst others), which has recently released a study estimating the net annualized benefit of a U.S. carbon cap to the agriculture sector at an extremely wide range of $1.2-$18.8 billion. The cornerstone of the EPA's argument is that revenue generated by monetizing carbon offsets would more than offset any incremental increase in energy and other costs that would result from a carbon cap. Under this scenario, farmers would be net beneficiaries of climate legislation.
In the anti-cap-and-trade corner are organizations like the American Farm Bureau (AFB), which hang their counter-argument on the notion that a carbon cap would drive energy and food prices skyward. The AFB argues that higher prices would, in part, result from a reduction in planted acreage, as crops give way to trees on more productive land as part of a possible offset program. The AFB argues that consumers would wind up bearing the brunt of the costs associated with the currently proposed legislation, and that American farmers would come up short relative to their foreign peers operating outside a carbon regime.
Skeptical farm-level stakeholders also cite the uncertainty surrounding the ultimate financial benefit that might be realized through monetizing offsets. This does not surprise us, given that the contours of offset-generating practices and investments remain shrouded in shades of grey. An additional layer of uncertainty surrounds the ultimate price and associated price volatility of carbon offsets. Generous government grants of carbon offsets to power generators (which are being doled out in part to dampen the effect of higher energy prices being passed along to the consumer) and blurry definitions of offset-qualifying activities create the potential for an oversupplied offset market, which could serve to drive down prices and the financial benefit that farmers would realize. This concern could be mitigated by Senate legislation proposing a price collar of $10-$28 per ton for offsets, a measure that has the backing of the Department of Energy.
As with any political issue, where you stand on
cap-and-trade depends on where you sit. Still, we think there's one point all
sides agree on: There exists a wide range of potential outcomes surrounding
climate change legislation, and its impact on agricultural producers in the
So how might all of this affect the firms in our agriculture industry coverage universe? In a best case scenario, where carbon offsets create a lucrative new revenue stream for U.S. farmers (at $18.8 billion, the top end of the EPA's estimate of the potential benefits of a cap-and-trade regime represents about a third of the USDA's $54 billion forecast for 2009 farm income), we think that a rising tide could lift all ships, as farmers reinvest their newfound windfall in their operations.
However, we think that the most likely outcome is less rosy.
Higher energy costs resulting from a cap-and-trade regime would place upward
pressure on the prices of key farm inputs like diesel and fertilizer. We think
that this scenario would be most detrimental to
Science, agriculture debate global food needs
(ABC
Radio Australia) – Recent figures show the world will need to produce 70
per cent more food in the next 40 years, to feed a ballooning population. Food
multinationals and a range of experts say only private-public partnerships and
markets can provide the means. The view that research and development by
private companies can deliver food security has broadly dominated the annual
international conference in
Presenter: Linda Mottram,
Speakers: Dr Marco Feroni, director, Syngenta Foundation for Sustainable Agriculture; Dr Namanga Ngongi, president, Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa; Dr Prabhu Pingali, deputy director of agricultural development, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation; Dr Dyno Keatinge, director general, World Vegetable Research and Development Centre
MOTTRAM: They've been demonised in the popular debate about food security. The giant private firms that've hybridised, modified and patented and made food big business. The work of firms like Monsanto, DuPont and Syngenta have fuelled myriad concerns. Many speakers at the Crawford Fund conference though -- including representatives from the food multinationals -- have offered reassurance. The executive director of the Syngenta corporation's Foundation for Sustainable Agriculture, Doctor Marco Feroni, told the conference private spending had stepped up where public spending globally had stagnated and while more needed to be done for the world's hundreds of millions of small farmers, it had been done before, successfully, in partnership with government.
FERRONI: This is how the Sahara and how
MOTTRAM: Doctor Ferroni says
FERRONI: The seed business really took off in India with the advent of private seed companies, but private seed companies were able to emerge only because they could rely on two things: one, public germ plasma, two, a pro-active, pro- business attitude on the part of both the national agricultural research system and international partners.
MOTTRAM: Other successes in broadly similar terms are cited
in the African states of
NGONGI: Those suspicions will always be there but you cannot stop the march of science and technology. I think that's the key, that we should get people geared up to understand that you do need to use the best of science.
MOTTRAM: Doctor Ngongi says government's alone cannot bring about the level of agricultural development required to feed the world. He also says the advantages brought by scientific innovation should change the perception of the private sector's role.
NGONGI: If you go from one tonne per hectare to four tonnes per hectare clearly you have gained three tonnes. The three tonnes you can sell to find the money to be able to buy the next seeds for the next year. Its an investment.
MOTTRAM: Governments should play an enabling role, he says, a view shared by the deputy director of agrictultural development at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Doctor Prabhu Pingali.
PINGALI: If you look at the emerging economies there's a
long history of the private sector working with the public sector, both at the
delivery of technologies at the farm level but also increasingly in the R and D
area. But if you look at sub-Saharan Africa, there I think the connection is very
poor and I think that's where we need to make a lot of effort to get the
lessons we've learned in Asia and
MOTTRAM: But a dissenting voice says the focus isn't right.
KEATINGE: Though I believe that the large scale private sector can feed the world it will not be able to nourish the world.
MOTTRAM: Agronomist Doctor Dyno Keatinge heads the World Vegetable Research and Development
Centre in
KEATINGE: For broadacre agriculture, the private sector are obviously depending upon hybrid seeds. But for many of the crops that we're dealing with particular in lets say the Pacific islands, hybrids are not that appropriate. And if you want to enable small scale farmers to continue to use seed which you've given them year after year after year you have to go back to open pollinated and self-pollinated material.
MOTTRAM: Doctor Keatinge says the private sector has no interest in non-hybrids, which is where government's must step in on behalf of poor farmers. It is, Doctor Keatinge says, a heretical view in forums like the Crawford conference.
Bayer Ag crop unit posts loss; sticks to forecast
(Bloomberg) -- Bayer AG stood by its 2009 forecast even after a loss at its crop chemicals unit caused third- quarter profit to fall 10 percent.
The German drugs and chemicals maker still expects to limit the decline in underlying earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization to 5 percent this year, though it reduced the margin target for crop treatments. Net income dropped to 249 million euros ($371 million) from 277 million euros a year earlier, Leverkusen-based Bayer said today.
Lower prices, bad weather, unfavorable currency exchange rates and lagging demand for weed and insect-killing chemicals resulted in a 16 million-euro loss before items at the CropScience division. Bayer, also a supplier of plastics and foams to the automotive industry and maker of the Nexavar cancer drug, said recovering demand for plastics and rising drug revenue would help it meet its full-year group targets.
“MaterialScience had a clear quarter-on-quarter improvement with a positive outlook” for the rest of the year, said Ulrich Huwald, a Hamburg-based analyst for MM Warburg Investment Research, referring to the plastics unit. “It’s clearly disappointing to see weakness in CropScience, but I wouldn’t throw the baby out with the bath water. In total, it’s a good result.”
The shares advanced 66 cents, or 1.4 percent, to 48.48 euros as of 12:08 p.m. in
Keeps Forecast
Chief Executive Officer Werner Wenning, who has led Bayer since April 2002, now expects the Ebitda margin before special items at the crop chemicals division to be 23 percent to 24 percent, lower than the 25 percent he previously forecast.
He repeated Bayer’s goal of 31 billion euros to 32 billion euros in sales this year. Third-quarter sales declined 7 percent to 7.39 billion euros.
Revenue from health care rose 3.5 percent to 3.94 billion euros in the three months through Sept. 30. Bayer is counting on the Betaseron multiple sclerosis treatment, the Yasmin family of contraceptive pills and the Nexavar cancer drug to help it weather the recession. Yasmin sales rose a currency-adjusted 4.6 percent, while revenue from Betaseron fell 3.7 percent.
MaterialScience
Sales of Nexavar, which is designed to cause fewer side effects than chemotherapy and competes with Pfizer Inc.’s Sutent, climbed 30 percent.
Revenue at Bayer’s MaterialScience unit rose a currency- adjusted 14 percent from the second quarter to 2 billion euros, as demand recovered in the industries the plastics unit serves. Sales fell 20 percent from the previous year. Bayer forecast underlying Ebitda for the unit in the fourth quarter to be “well ahead of the prior-year period” as the economic environment continues to stabilize.
Bayer reduced production and trimmed working hours at the plastics unit, which is among the largest makers of the polycarbonates used to make compact discs and polyurethanes that go in foams and shoe soles, as the global recession hampered demand. Bayer said in July it would accelerate restructuring plans and shut some production of polyurethanes, coatings, adhesives and basic chemicals by the end of the year.
Restructuring
The restructuring, which Bayer now expects to be completed by the end of the year, will cost about 350 million euros, or 100 million euros more than originally planned, the German company said.
Bayer also reduced its net financial debt by 1 billion euros to 10.7 billion euros as of Sept. 30. The debt reduction gives scope for the company to make acquisitions, Wenning said.
“Should there be possibilities in the market for a takeover that would strengthen our portfolio, we would certainly analyze the possibility and then act accordingly,” he said.
IPhone application calculates spray tank mixes
(Wire Services) –
The innovative application, called Marrone Mobile Agä Tank Mix Calculator, is a free application for use on the iPhone and iPod Touch that can quickly, easily and accurately help growers and applicators calculate proper ratios of up to any three pesticide products to be mixed together in the spray tank.
The application is easy to use. All that is needed is the capacity of the spray tank, the total area planned to treat and the proper rates of the products to be applied. The application calculates proper volumes for each product for each tank fill, the number of tank mixes needed to cover the area and the total amount of each product needed to cover the entire area.
Like the company’s products and its online eLearning course on biopesticides, Marrone’s iPhone application is another example of the company looking to drive innovation in the agriculture market. The company’s iPhone app and eLearning course can be accessed through the company’s website at www.marronebioinnovations.com.
“Efficacy, ease of use and innovation are always the driving forces in everything we do, and this mobile application is just another small example,” says Pam Marrone, CEO and Founder, Marrone Bio Innovations. “The tank mix app is one of many practical tools and products we will introduce to help farmers, pest control advisors and their field crews be more efficient in managing weeds, pests and plant diseases.”
MBI expects to introduce a version for Blackberry smart phones in the future.
End Transmission