Ontario Agriculture

The network for agriculture in Ontario, Canada

Ethanol Debate: Food versus Fuel versus Livestock Industry. Where do you stand and why?

This past week we were at three meetings where the ethanol industry was challenged by people and we thought it would make for a good discussion area. Where do you stand and why? What should we do so that we can take advantage of the emerging bio energy opportunity for agriculture?

Thanks,

The Farms.com Team

Views: 204

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by OntAG Admin on September 19, 2009 at 4:56am
We will stir the pot with the first few comments.

The George Morris Centre recently release a new report that make some points in this debate.

Opening the Throttle and Applying the Brakes:
The Disconnected Poli...
Permalink Reply by OntAG Admin on September 19, 2009 at 5:00am
We saw this reply from Tom Cox from IGPC and will contact them for additional comments.

Ethanol cooperative chair challenges George Morris Centre report.

Ethanol production has increased the availability of corn in Ontario says Tom Cox chair of the Integrated Grain Processors Cooperative, which operates an ethanol plant in Aylmer, Ontario.


The GMC report, Opening the Throttle and Applying the Brakes, makes the conclusion that it is the growth in the ethanol sector that is largely responsible for the struggles in the hog industry here in Ontario. To reach that conclusion one would, presumably, have to assume that supplies of corn are less available today now that there is greater ethanol production than there was prior to the recent expansion of the ethanol industry.

Prior to 2005 there were two ethanol plants in Ontario, a large relatively modern one at Chatham and a small older plant at Tiverton. Since that time four plants have come on line: a retrofit of an existing starch plant at Collingwood and new plants at Sarnia, Aylmer and Johnstown, with the last two coming on line this crop year.

In the five years prior to the current ethanol expansion that began in '05, we consumed on average about 47 million bushels (with a high of 57 million and a low of 33 million) domestically more than we produced.

In the three years since ethanol began using a much greater volume of corn, beginning with the '06 crop, we consumed on average 31 million bushels (with a high of 41 and a low of 24) more than we produced.

Clearly ethanol production consumes a considerable amount of corn however corn producers have responded to the increased demand with a considerable increase in production.

The relative availability of corn in the Ontario market is also reflected in the adjusted basis, which is a numerical measure of the relative strength or weakness of demand in the domestic market. Looking back over the recent past Ontario’s adjusted basis has been flat to declining, not at all the situation portrayed by the GMC report.

The conclusion that we should have less demand for corn from ethanol and thus lower corn basis levels ignores the fact that if we have lower demand and lower prices we will also see lower production. As we have seen recently growers of corn will respond to market opportunities and also to the disappearance of opportunities.

It is also unrealistic to think that we here in Ontario can be the low cost producer of corn in North America given our slightly lower corn yields and significantly higher drying costs.

What is the most disheartening about this report is not that it offers a critical observation of the ethanol industry, which is certainly acceptable, but that instead of focusing its attention on solutions that might actually benefit hog producers the authors choose to instead try and drive an unhelpful wedge between the producers and the users of corn.

Tom Cox
Lynden, Ontario
Permalink Reply by Joe Dales on September 22, 2009 at 5:12am
I would like to think that agriculture can accomplish all of the objectives. Food....the livestock sector should be profitable even with higher feed costs...the major issues are the CDN dollar and the poor prices the markets punish producers with when there is a few percentages of overproduction....Fuel...I like the idea of the plant capturing the suns energy and converting it to energy we can power our vehicles with.
Permalink Reply by Wayne Black on September 22, 2009 at 8:54am
Really what value does converting the plant energy to fuel when I read something like this today:
"“This agricultural land tends to be close to the transmission lines and, yes, sun is important for agriculture as well as for solar,” McDonald said in an interview.
“All we’ve said we need is .11 per cent of the agricultural land in Ontario, and much of this land isn’t being used right now (for farming).”
That works out to about 20,000 acres (81 square kilometres) of land, some of which is already used for alternative energy production such as growing corn for ethanol, said McDonald."

So it is okay to take land out of production because "it is only being used for ethanol"? Oh wait - the best line yet:
"Solar panels also provide rental income to farmers, and the companies have plans to decommission the solar farms after 20 years and return the land for agricultural use, said McDonald."

Now is that the biggest line of *ra* that you have seen yet? How many people have seen crop land being used for infrastructure brought back into crop production?
Full article in The Record today (Sept. 22):
http://news.therecord.com/Business/article/601608

Wayne Black

Joe Dales said:
I would like to think that agriculture can accomplish all of the objectives. Food....the livestock sector should be profitable even with higher feed costs...the major issues are the CDN dollar and the poor prices the markets punish producers with when there is a few percentages of overproduction....Fuel...I like the idea of the plant capturing the suns energy and converting it to energy we can power our vehicles with.
Permalink Reply by Steve Twynstra on October 8, 2009 at 2:38pm
Just where in my creed does it say that I MUST subsidize consumer food prices? If food was free it would only create more problems thru obesity, say, wait a minute, hmmmm......... :)

I lose all interest in this sort of drivel when people willingly started paying +$2.00 for a 340ml bottle of tap water! As for feeding the poor, when warlords are clearly prevented from murdering and economically raping their constituents I might reconsider my position!

Economics 101....an adjustment will occur and livestock prices WILL increase to reflect the new cost of doing business. It just might not be local livestock until the full adjustment, reflecting increased transportation costs for foreign product, occurs. This assumes that foreign product meets all our rigorous food traceability costs..... :)
Permalink Reply by Steve Twynstra on October 8, 2009 at 2:39pm
Well said Tom!

OntAG Admin said:
We saw this reply from Tom Cox from IGPC and will contact them for additional comments.

Ethanol cooperative chair challenges George Morris Centre report.

Ethanol production has increased the availability of corn in Ontario says Tom Cox chair of the Integrated Grain Processors Cooperative, which operates an ethanol plant in Aylmer, Ontario.


The GMC report, Opening the Throttle and Applying the Brakes, makes the conclusion that it is the growth in the ethanol sector that is largely responsible for the struggles in the hog industry here in Ontario. To reach that conclusion one would, presumably, have to assume that supplies of corn are less available today now that there is greater ethanol production than there was prior to the recent expansion of the ethanol industry.

Prior to 2005 there were two ethanol plants in Ontario, a large relatively modern one at Chatham and a small older plant at Tiverton. Since that time four plants have come on line: a retrofit of an existing starch plant at Collingwood and new plants at Sarnia, Aylmer and Johnstown, with the last two coming on line this crop year.

In the five years prior to the current ethanol expansion that began in '05, we consumed on average about 47 million bushels (with a high of 57 million and a low of 33 million) domestically more than we produced.

In the three years since ethanol began using a much greater volume of corn, beginning with the '06 crop, we consumed on average 31 million bushels (with a high of 41 and a low of 24) more than we produced.

Clearly ethanol production consumes a considerable amount of corn however corn producers have responded to the increased demand with a considerable increase in production.

The relative availability of corn in the Ontario market is also reflected in the adjusted basis, which is a numerical measure of the relative strength or weakness of demand in the domestic market. Looking back over the recent past Ontario’s adjusted basis has been flat to declining, not at all the situation portrayed by the GMC report.

The conclusion that we should have less demand for corn from ethanol and thus lower corn basis levels ignores the fact that if we have lower demand and lower prices we will also see lower production. As we have seen recently growers of corn will respond to market opportunities and also to the disappearance of opportunities.

It is also unrealistic to think that we here in Ontario can be the low cost producer of corn in North America given our slightly lower corn yields and significantly higher drying costs.

What is the most disheartening about this report is not that it offers a critical observation of the ethanol industry, which is certainly acceptable, but that instead of focusing its attention on solutions that might actually benefit hog producers the authors choose to instead try and drive an unhelpful wedge between the producers and the users of corn.

Tom Cox
Lynden, Ontario

▶ Reply to Discussion

RSS

Agriculture Headlines from Farms.com Canada East News - click on title for full story

Guinness World Record attempt to take place in St. Albert on Aug. 22

?ST. ALBERT – If you have ever wanted to witness an attempt at a Guinness World Record, then you will want to be in St. Albert, Ontario on August 22 when an attempt will be made to set a record for the most plow blades pulled simultaneously.

Why Alignment Matters: Domestic Check-Off and the Import Levy

When Canadian beef producers sell cattle, they contribute to the national beef check-off. That investment supports work that benefits the broader Canadian beef industry, including market development, consumer demand, public and stakeholder engagement, and research. When beef or beef cattle are imported into Canada, an import levy is also collected. While the structure is not identical in every detail, the principle behind it is straightforward: beef marketed in Canada should help contribute to the programs that support beef demand in Canada. The national check-off paid by producers and the import levy paid on eligible imports are two parts of a broader investment approach. Together, they help ensure that both domestic beef production and imported beef products are connected to the market development work that strengthens beef’s position with Canadian consumers. For producers, the domestic cattle check-off is collected at the point of sale and includes both national and provincial po

I’ve noticed a lot of wild oat escapes in some of my fields this year; what can I do to prevent it from getting worse next year?

Despite our best efforts, sometimes even the best laid weed control plans go wrong! The first thing to remember is that not all weed escapes are created equal. In some cases, weeds can survive because of application timing issues, challenging weather conditions or late flushes that emerge after spraying. However, when weeds aren’t controlled by herbicide applications, herbicide resistance should also be on your radar. A recent survey in Manitoba found that in fields with uncontrolled wild oats, 100 per cent of populations were resistant to Group 1 products, 82 per cent were resistant to Group 2 products, and 82 per cent were resistant to both Group 1 and 2 herbicides. Those numbers show how important it is to take a closer look at wild oat weed escapes. Identifying why your herbicide failed to control wild oats is the first step toward finding a solution. Start by scouting the field to narrow down the cause. Consider factors such as application timing, weather conditions, late flush

Is fungicide actually effective on Sclerotinia head rot in sunflower?

This is one of the most difficult questions to answer because there are many things to consider. I also don’t want to be outright negative because we do still have options for sclerotinia management in sunflowers. However, management is the operative word. First of all, sclerotinia head rot infections have an interesting pathway. Spores use dead sunflower florets, plus pollen, as the base to infect a sunflower plant. The spores grow into the receptacle, infecting and decaying the entire head after a period of time. Sclerotinia wilt (basal stalk rot) and mid-stalk rot are also infected by the same sclerotinia species, but it will be via the mycelia that grow from the sclerotia bodies in the soil for basal stalk rot. Mid-stalk rot is also infected by ascospores, but this can be earlier in the season than head rot or at the same time. So, management of sclerotinia does not start at flowering. Crop rotation is the most obvious management tool that we are familiar with in sunflowers, but

Using Water More Efficiently in Beef Packing Plants

Packing plants use a time-tested approach to clean their facilities. The first step uses high-pressure hot water to remove fat and meat scraps from equipment, floors and walls. Next, surfaces are cleaned using detergent. Finally, sanitizers are used to further reduce bacterial numbers. Processing companies want to reduce water use as part of their environmental goals and to reduce energy bills. High-pressure water and steam can produce aerosols that capture bacteria and spread them throughout the plant. They can then settle on and cross-contaminate clean surfaces long after the cleaning has been completed, which complicates efforts to effectively clean facilities. Biofilms are another problem. Biofilms are colonies of bacteria surrounded by a protective layer that firmly attaches them to surfaces and shelters the bacteria from hot water, detergents and sanitizers. Biofilms are hard to remove and are commonly found in hard-to-reach places. These researchers investigated potential cro

© 2026   Created by Darren Marsland.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service