4.01.2008

By CARYL VELISEK

(Editor’s Note: Caryl Velisek is a longtime correspondent for American Farm Publications.)

Recently I attended a marketing seminar for farmers. It was excellent and informative.
There was a session on growing crops for fuel and another on forestry and what trees do for the environment of this planet.
In retrospect, the two theories almost seem to be at odds.
Biofuels are more friendly to the environment than petroleum products. We all know that, or we should.
They cut down on the use of oil, which — if we are to believe the “experts” — we will run out of in the not-too-distant future.
Some of the crops we can use to produce fuel — switchgrass, for instance — grow like weeds under less-than-ideal conditions.
This is all very exciting and could mean less dependence on oil and also mean more income for farmers.
But there is, of course, another side to this.
Many of the crops we can use to produce fuels are food crops used to feed humans and the animals we consume as food.
These new uses create competition. We are already seeing higher prices for some food/fuel crops as the production of biofuels catches on. And we haven’t even scratched the surface yet.
These crops need land to grow on. The population of the world is increasing rapidly so we will need more land for housing and growing food, and, now, for growing fuel for our vehicles and other energy like heat, electricity and running the machinery we use to produce just about everything.
As we need more and more land for these crops and for the burgeoning population, we will need to clear more land on which to grow these crops.
We all know, or we should know by past experience, what stripping the land of trees and forests does. You know, floods, dirtier air, land slides, dust storms (Does anyone remember the Dust Bowl?), that sort of thing. It is incredible what beneficial effect trees have on our environment.
Much more than I thought or even dreamed of.
Grain farmers are experiencing great prices now because of the expanding use of ethanol and other biofuels, and it is only a small percentage at this time of the fuel we use. But livestock farmers are paying more for feed and fuel to run their tractors, milkers and silage wagons and to feed their stock — our food.
So, as we take more and more land for more and more crops, we are creating problems that could affect us in worse ways than an oil shortage and higher gas prices: A Catch 22 situation.
Maybe if we took a breath and slowed our headlong dash into the production of alternative fuels and looked at all the alternatives open to us instead of just one or two, we could figure out a way to use all our options and keep a balance. Even to keep those good prices going.
Maybe we need a plan.
Planning is something we, as humans, find difficult to do for some reason when it comes to a quick buck.
We could take a second look at wind, solar and water power. We could actually start to drive vehicles that don’t use as much fuel even if they do slow us down a tad and aren’t quite as convenient to use.
The price of these vehicles should come down as demand increases. (Remember the old rule of supply and demand?)
We could stop moving out of our cities and building mansions we can’t even fill and try living in spaces we can. Just to mention a few.
We’re going to need that land for food for us and our livestock, and we are going to have to increase food production on the land that we have or clear more land for production.
Food is just something we don’t do too well without.
Yet, there is more demand for food produced without the things we have developed over the years to increase food and crop production.
Things like bst, chemical fertilizers and hybridization, or genetic engineering.
At the rate we’re going now, maybe space exploration isn’t such a “way out” idea after all.
We might need another planet just to grow switchgrass on one day.