Commodity prices stable, will go up again
This week corn started with highs and ended with lows, but there were definitely quality issues. End users in most parts of the country are sceptical about availability of corn on long term basis and planning for large storage. But this would also push up prices for the small end users.
The average price of corn at the start of the week at the market yards across the country was Rs.6100 ($137) per MT, which by the end of the week had come down to Rs.5960 ($134) per MT. The price was definitely higher than last year’s average price of Rs.5362 ($121), an approximate increase of 11.15% over last year.
Bajra (Pearl Millet) prices which were at Rs.6760 ($152) per MT at the start of the week ended at Rs.7210 ($162) per MT, an increase of 6.67% in one week. The prices are higher by Rs.1250 ($28) per MT than corn (21%). Poultry industry would use some pearl millet, if the prices are lower by 20% to cover by the reduced efficiency of the grain, but at a higher price, it is not feasible to use pearl millet in poultry rations.
Jowar (Grain Sorghum), which started the week with a low of Rs.6340 ($142) per MT, had increased to Rs.6740 ($152) per MT by the end of the week, an increase of 6.3% in one week. The last year’s price of sorghum at this time of the year was Rs.6630 ($149) per MT. In Indian Grain sorghum can also be used in poultry rations, but only if the prices 18-20% lower than corn. Currently the prices are Rs.780 ($17.5) per MT, almost 13% higher than corn.
As prices of all commodities are going up, it is becoming increasingly difficult for the grain end users in poultry & starch sector to meet their needs. The output prices are not going up to that extent, which might force some of the small operators to shut shop in times to come.
In US the CBOT on corn closed higher at $86.19 per MT, approximately higher by 6.71% than last week’s close. The FOB price of corn US corn (US Gulf) remained same at $106 per MT.
Last week’s market report can be seen at
http://www.grains.org/galleries/market_perspectives/mp_01-20-06.pdf
Ethanol Yields More Energy and is less polluting (from grainnet)
Yet another study finds ethanol production to have a positive energy balance, meaning it gives more energy that is takes to produce a liter of ethanol. A study conducted by Professors Daniel Kammen, Alex Farrell, and their associates at University of California-Berkeley's Energy and Resources Group and the Goldman School of Public Policy was published on Friday, Jan 2006, also finds that ethanol decreases dangerous greenhouse gas emissions.
According to the results, producing ethanol from corn uses much less petroleum than producing gasoline. The study found that the production and use of ethanol reduces greenhouse gas emission by 15 percent compared to oil and gasoline use.
These findings are consistent with those of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Argonne National Laboratory, which estimates that the use of 10 percent ethanol blends would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by up to 19 percent.
While corn will continue to be the major feedstock for U.S. ethanol production, the development of cellulosic ethanol technology offers a promising compliment and a new era for the U.S. ethanol industry. Currently, 95 ethanol plants have a combined production capacity of more than 4.3 billion gallons (16.2 Billion liters) a year. There are 31 ethanol plants and nine expansions under construction with a combined annual capacity of more than 1.5 billion gallons (5.67 billion liters).
The increased demand of ethanol can also bee seen in the USDA’s reports. 2006 baseline projection report is due out in February 2006, and is expected to highlight a dramatic hike in corn use (for ethanol) with the inclusion of the 7.5 billion gallon (28.39 billion liters) Renewable Fuel Standard in last summer's energy law. The phasing out of the fuel additive methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) has increased demand for ethanol as a gasoline oxygenate. WASDE report of Jan 2006 estimated 40 MMT use of corn for ethanol in the year 2006.
Focus on increasing poultry consumption
The newly formed International Poultry Council (IPC) focused on increasing poultry consumption in the world at the recent International Poultry Exposition (IPE) at Atlanta. In some countries the consumption of poultry meat has declined due to the fear of Avian Influenza.
It also agreed that the members would work together to maintain consumer and customer confidence in poultry products, with other agencies such as the World Health Organization.
The main strategy of IPC is to send a message to consumers that poultry is safe to eat if it is properly handled and cooked. USA Poultry and Egg Export Council (USAPEEC) has placed a large poster on a downtown Atlanta billboard near to the World Congress Center, the IPE site. The poster features a chicken dressed in an apron and it reads: "Poultry's safe. Just cook it." The IPC has endorsed this message (shown above). Not to leave behind eggs, a similar poster has been designed for eggs.
The member countries of the IPC are Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Central America, Chile, China, Egypt, the European Union, Mexico, Peru, Russia, Thailand, Turkey and the USA.
If you have any interest in the IPC charter, please contact and the same can be sent to you.
Amit Sachdev
Representative
U S Grains Council, India
bluecross303@gmail.com
Jan 28, 2006
Saturday, January 28, 2006
Saturday, January 21, 2006
Commodity prices moving up in India, no respite in sight; WASDE Report update; Poultry Farmers in India in dire straits, due to high commodity prices
Commodity prices moving up in India, no respite in sight
As we enter the third week of the new year, the corn prices moved slightly up. The average prices for the varieties which has started at Rs.5830 ($131) per MT at the start of the week and moved down by mid week to Rs.5700 ($128) per MT, but by the end of the week the prices had touched a new high of Rs.6000 ($135) per MT by the end of the week. In the states the prices also touched an all time high of Rs.6450 ($145) at the market yard and prices moving up in all states including Andhra Pradesh Rs.5340 ($120); Bihar Rs.5785 ($130); Gujarat Rs.6000 ($135); Karnataka Rs.4985 ($112); Madhya Pradesh Rs.5960 ($134); Maharashtra Rs.5785 ($130); Uttar Pradesh 6450 ($145). The average for the week was calculated as Rs.6100 ($137), up Rs.140 ($3) per ton from last weeks Rs.5960 ($134) per MT a gain of 2.3% in one week. The average prices are higher by almost 13.12% over last year’s price of Rs.5385 ($121) during the same period.
The spot prices in Nizamabad were Rs.5530 ($124) per MT while in Davangere the Spot prices were Rs.5330 ($120) per MT.
In US, Corn price at CBOT was $80.77 per MT for March Delivery. The price for May delivery was quoted at $84.70 per MT. Last week March delivery closed at $84.12, while May delivery had closed at $87.86 per MT. FOB value of corn, US gulf was quoted at $101 per MT for Jan, Feb and March deliveries.
Barley prices at the market also are up and average price which was Rs.8230 ($185) per MT at the market yard are up to Rs.8950 ($201) per MT, an increase of 8.6% in 2 weeks. The average price for US barley (FOB, Pacific North West is $108 per MT. In India since there is no varietal purity, it is difficult to get a price for malting barley. In US there is discussion to move up the protein standard in malting barley up to 13.5%. In India in most cases the barley is available at 9.5 – 1.5% protein level. Current price at elevator level in US $124 per MT for the farmer for specific varieties.
The market perspectives for week ending Jan 13, 2006 can be found at
http://www.grains.org/buying/market_perspectives/mp_01-13-06.pdf
WASDE Report predicts high corn and lower barley production in US
The World Agriculture Supply & Demand Estimate report out last week (Jan 12, 2006) has predicted an increased world supply of corn from 677.65 MMT in Dec 2005 to 683.51 MMT. Of the total supply, US will produce almost 41.3% (282.26 MMT) for the year 2005-06. The usage in feed is expected to be up to 152.4 MMT in US from 149.23 MMT. The Food, Seed and Industrial usage is expected to be 75.18 MMT while the use for Ethanol production is expected to be 40 MMT. The crop for the year 2005-06 is expected to be second highest crop after 2004-05 crop and the average productivity is expected to be 3.75 tons/acre. The average price to the farmer is expected to be $69.89 – 80.70 per MT.
In the same report, Barley production is expected to be down to 4.6 MMT which is probably the lowest. The export surplus is expected to be 0.65 MMT. Of the total production 1.5 MMt will be used in Feed, while 3 MMT is expected to be used in Food, Seed and Industrial uses.
China on the other hand is expected to produce 134 MMT of corn (as per Jan estimates). The last estimates (Dec 2005) predicted a production of 130 MMT. China is expected to export 6 MMT of corn and the ending stocks are expected to be 30.26 MMT, about 4 MMT estimated in Dec 2005.
Another report estimates China’s total grain consumption in the 2005-2006 to be a record at 500 MMT. The per head grain consumption will reach 386.5 kilograms and the grain imports will account for 5.1 percent of total grain consumption over the course of the year. The corn consumption is estimated at 128 MMT.
Poultry Farmers in India in dire straits due to increased commodity prices
Poultry farmers, especially layer farmers in Ajmer (Rajasthan), Kashipur (Uttranchal), Gurgaon (Haryana) and all over north India are suffering due to increased maize prices. Many have purchased maize at a price as high at Rs.7500 ($168) per ton (delivered) at their mills and farms and prices are going up and egg prices steadily decreasing. In Dec 2005 the average egg price was Rs.182 per 100 while by Jan 15th the prices had dropped to Rs.145 per 100, a loss of almost 20% in 2 weeks. (The prices are those received by farmers at farm)
Till last year, farmers were using Barja (Pearl Millet) and Jowar (Grain Sorghum) in poultry rations, but with the average prices of these two grains also touching a high of Rs.6719 ($151) per MT and Rs.6897 ($155) per MT, which is much higher than the average corn price of Rs.6100 ($137) per MT, they are unable to use the these grains. Also when India had surplus wheat in its go-down, poultry farmers used wheat in layer rations, but with the prices touching over Rs.10000 ($224) per ton in some markets and Government of India does not have any wheat for poultry use. It will be difficult for the farmers to feed birds in times to come.
Some prices at the poultry farm level (delivered at farm) reveal an interesting trend;
1. Maize prices in Oct 2003 were Rs.5380 ($121) per MT and reached a high of Rs.5750 ($129) per MT in Dec 2003. The prices were highest in Aug 2004 at Rs.6080 ($136.6) per MT when there was no production.
2. In Oct 2004 the maize prices were Rs.5700 ($ 128); new production and by Dec 2004 has reached Rs.5850 ($131) per MT. In August 2005 the prices had reached Rs.6670 ($150) per MT which by Sept 2005 were up to Rs.6980 ($157) per MT.
3. In Oct 2005 the prices of maize were Rs.6550 ($147) per MT for new crop which in Dec 2005 had reached Rs.6850 ($154) per MT.
Prices every year have opened higher than last year in October, when new crop cop comes in and have increased steadily and have reached the highest in September every year when there is no production. The prices in Dec 2005 are close to September 2005 levels, even though new crop arrived in the market. With the current prices so high, one can only guess what will be the prices in April – September 2006.
Amit Sachdev
Representative
U S Grains Council, India
bluecross303@gmail.com
Jan 21, 2006
As we enter the third week of the new year, the corn prices moved slightly up. The average prices for the varieties which has started at Rs.5830 ($131) per MT at the start of the week and moved down by mid week to Rs.5700 ($128) per MT, but by the end of the week the prices had touched a new high of Rs.6000 ($135) per MT by the end of the week. In the states the prices also touched an all time high of Rs.6450 ($145) at the market yard and prices moving up in all states including Andhra Pradesh Rs.5340 ($120); Bihar Rs.5785 ($130); Gujarat Rs.6000 ($135); Karnataka Rs.4985 ($112); Madhya Pradesh Rs.5960 ($134); Maharashtra Rs.5785 ($130); Uttar Pradesh 6450 ($145). The average for the week was calculated as Rs.6100 ($137), up Rs.140 ($3) per ton from last weeks Rs.5960 ($134) per MT a gain of 2.3% in one week. The average prices are higher by almost 13.12% over last year’s price of Rs.5385 ($121) during the same period.
The spot prices in Nizamabad were Rs.5530 ($124) per MT while in Davangere the Spot prices were Rs.5330 ($120) per MT.
In US, Corn price at CBOT was $80.77 per MT for March Delivery. The price for May delivery was quoted at $84.70 per MT. Last week March delivery closed at $84.12, while May delivery had closed at $87.86 per MT. FOB value of corn, US gulf was quoted at $101 per MT for Jan, Feb and March deliveries.
Barley prices at the market also are up and average price which was Rs.8230 ($185) per MT at the market yard are up to Rs.8950 ($201) per MT, an increase of 8.6% in 2 weeks. The average price for US barley (FOB, Pacific North West is $108 per MT. In India since there is no varietal purity, it is difficult to get a price for malting barley. In US there is discussion to move up the protein standard in malting barley up to 13.5%. In India in most cases the barley is available at 9.5 – 1.5% protein level. Current price at elevator level in US $124 per MT for the farmer for specific varieties.
The market perspectives for week ending Jan 13, 2006 can be found at
http://www.grains.org/buying/market_perspectives/mp_01-13-06.pdf
WASDE Report predicts high corn and lower barley production in US
The World Agriculture Supply & Demand Estimate report out last week (Jan 12, 2006) has predicted an increased world supply of corn from 677.65 MMT in Dec 2005 to 683.51 MMT. Of the total supply, US will produce almost 41.3% (282.26 MMT) for the year 2005-06. The usage in feed is expected to be up to 152.4 MMT in US from 149.23 MMT. The Food, Seed and Industrial usage is expected to be 75.18 MMT while the use for Ethanol production is expected to be 40 MMT. The crop for the year 2005-06 is expected to be second highest crop after 2004-05 crop and the average productivity is expected to be 3.75 tons/acre. The average price to the farmer is expected to be $69.89 – 80.70 per MT.
In the same report, Barley production is expected to be down to 4.6 MMT which is probably the lowest. The export surplus is expected to be 0.65 MMT. Of the total production 1.5 MMt will be used in Feed, while 3 MMT is expected to be used in Food, Seed and Industrial uses.
China on the other hand is expected to produce 134 MMT of corn (as per Jan estimates). The last estimates (Dec 2005) predicted a production of 130 MMT. China is expected to export 6 MMT of corn and the ending stocks are expected to be 30.26 MMT, about 4 MMT estimated in Dec 2005.
Another report estimates China’s total grain consumption in the 2005-2006 to be a record at 500 MMT. The per head grain consumption will reach 386.5 kilograms and the grain imports will account for 5.1 percent of total grain consumption over the course of the year. The corn consumption is estimated at 128 MMT.
Poultry Farmers in India in dire straits due to increased commodity prices
Poultry farmers, especially layer farmers in Ajmer (Rajasthan), Kashipur (Uttranchal), Gurgaon (Haryana) and all over north India are suffering due to increased maize prices. Many have purchased maize at a price as high at Rs.7500 ($168) per ton (delivered) at their mills and farms and prices are going up and egg prices steadily decreasing. In Dec 2005 the average egg price was Rs.182 per 100 while by Jan 15th the prices had dropped to Rs.145 per 100, a loss of almost 20% in 2 weeks. (The prices are those received by farmers at farm)
Till last year, farmers were using Barja (Pearl Millet) and Jowar (Grain Sorghum) in poultry rations, but with the average prices of these two grains also touching a high of Rs.6719 ($151) per MT and Rs.6897 ($155) per MT, which is much higher than the average corn price of Rs.6100 ($137) per MT, they are unable to use the these grains. Also when India had surplus wheat in its go-down, poultry farmers used wheat in layer rations, but with the prices touching over Rs.10000 ($224) per ton in some markets and Government of India does not have any wheat for poultry use. It will be difficult for the farmers to feed birds in times to come.
Some prices at the poultry farm level (delivered at farm) reveal an interesting trend;
1. Maize prices in Oct 2003 were Rs.5380 ($121) per MT and reached a high of Rs.5750 ($129) per MT in Dec 2003. The prices were highest in Aug 2004 at Rs.6080 ($136.6) per MT when there was no production.
2. In Oct 2004 the maize prices were Rs.5700 ($ 128); new production and by Dec 2004 has reached Rs.5850 ($131) per MT. In August 2005 the prices had reached Rs.6670 ($150) per MT which by Sept 2005 were up to Rs.6980 ($157) per MT.
3. In Oct 2005 the prices of maize were Rs.6550 ($147) per MT for new crop which in Dec 2005 had reached Rs.6850 ($154) per MT.
Prices every year have opened higher than last year in October, when new crop cop comes in and have increased steadily and have reached the highest in September every year when there is no production. The prices in Dec 2005 are close to September 2005 levels, even though new crop arrived in the market. With the current prices so high, one can only guess what will be the prices in April – September 2006.
Amit Sachdev
Representative
U S Grains Council, India
bluecross303@gmail.com
Jan 21, 2006
Saturday, January 14, 2006
Commodity price update; 2005 – A Year of successes for Plant and Animal Biotechnology
Commodity price update
In the second week of the new year, the commodity prices in India were on the rise and it seems the prices will not come down in the near future. For Barley the week started with an average price of Rs.8900 ($200) per MT at the market yard and by the mid week had reached Rs.9211 ($207) per MT at the market yard.
Corn (Maize) average price was Rs.5851 ($131.5) per MT which by mid week had reached Rs.5940 ($133.5) per MT and remained the same till the end of the week. In the second week of January 2004, the average price was Rs.5492 ($123.5) per MT, i.e., the price this week is higher by about 8.3% than last year. The prices in production areas like Bihar and UP are showing an abnormal trend of increasing too fast. Bihar local prices were at a high of Rs.5918 ($133) per MT while prices in UP were at a high of Rs.6360 ($143) per MT and most of the end users in North India were buying corn at a price of Rs.7500 per MT ($168) per MT delivered to there plant sites.
The market prices in Gujarat are touching Rs.6096 ($137) per MT. The end users are receiving maize at Rs.7000 ($157 per MT).
Future prices of corn in India are also reported to be higher at $126 for Jan, $126 for Feb, $131 for Mar and $133 for Apr. Spot prices in Nizamabad were $126 while in Dawangere the prices were reported at $118 per MT.
Corn closed at CBOT at $83.83 per MT a little lower than last weeks close of $84.4 per MT. The FOB value is close to $104 per MT.
In the current scenario, when Indian corn prices are high, it is getting difficult for poultry and starch users to keep up with the prices, but they will have to live with these highs as the prices are likely to remain high till the end of March until the new crops arrives in Bihar and Tamil Nadu. The prices can be expected to go up again in April 2006 and continue to rise until the new crop arrives in Oct 2006.
2005 – A Year of successes for Plant and Animal Biotechnology
The year 2005 was a year of successes when biotechnology completed a decade of commercialization and the billionth acre was planned in the year 2005. The year also saw the mapping of rice and dog genomes and major projects to sequence the genomes of corn, soybean and sheep were announced. In 2005, a major contribution on nutrient enhanced research also came from Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation by way of a $36.8 million grant. The grant will enable focused research on improving nutrition and health through biotech-improved bananas, cassava, rice and sorghum.
As per a release from Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO), other consumer benefits included:
1. Kellogs announcement of using low-linolenic acid soybean oil to reduce trans fats in several of its products.
2. Development of an improved cress having omega-3 fatty acids which reduce the risk of heart disease.
3. Research continued on edible vaccines with development og biotech potato with Hepatitis B vaccine, a biotech tomato with SARS vaccine.
4. Japanese researchers developed a biotech soybean that contains a product that will promote hair growth and prevent hair loss caused by Chemotherapy.
Over the year International organization continued their support to biotechnology and highlighted the benefits of biotechnology:
• The World Health Organization (WHO) reported that biotech foods can “contribute to enhancing human health and development.” The study found that biotech foods can increase crop yield, food quality, and the diversity of foods which can be grown in a given area, and lead to better health and nutrition, and thereby raise health and living standards.
• A report issued by USDA’s Economic Research Service (ERS) and Rutgers University also found that large farms and small-scale farmers in southern Africa can benefit from planting biotech corn. The report found that yields on large farmers increased about 11 percent, and yields for small farms increased anywhere from seven to 56 percent, when biotech corn was planted.
• A National Center for Food and Agriculture Policy (NCFAP) study found that the 118 million acres of biotech crops U.S. farmers planted in 2004 increased food production by 6.6 billion pounds, and provided $2.3 billion in additional net returns for U.S. growers. Biotech crops also reduced pesticide use by an additional 34 percent, or 15.6 million pounds.
• The British research firm PG Economics Ltd. found that the global use of biotechnology-derived crops has added $27 billion to farm income and greatly reduced agriculture’s negative impacts upon the environment.
• An April, Science published a study by researchers at Rutgers University and the University of California, Davis who found that biotech rice in China could decrease farmer’s production costs, increase harvest yields, reduce the use of pesticides by as much as 80 percent, and improve farmer health. The study also estimated that if “90 percent of the farmers plant [biotech] rice, the annual agricultural income of China will increase by $4 billion.”
• A study by the University of Connecticut and Japan’s Kagoshima Prefectural Cattle Breeding Development Institute found that meat and milk products from cloned cattle are safe for consumption. The results reiterate those found by the National Academy of Science in 2001.
After a decade of commercialization, driven by farmer demand, the growth in biotech crop has continued. In 2005 the growth was 11%, despite the obstacles raised by many NGO’s. As per ISAAA’s report, 250,000 new farmers in four new countries planted biotech crops in 2005. In 1996 the biotech crop area was 4.2 million acres in 6 countries, which in 2005 soared to 222 million acres in 21 countries, an increase of 52 times.
New additions in 2005 included, Iran which, grew its first crop of biotech rice, the first biotech planting of this important food crop globally. The Czech Republic which, planted Bt maize for the first time.
There are now five EU countries growing biotech crops, Spain, Germany, France, Portugal and the Czech Republic. The trend is likely to continue
Of the 21 countries that are planting biotech crops, 14 have the “mega-country” status by planting 125,000 acres of more, as per ISAAA. The countries include United States, Argentina, Brazil, Canada, China, Paraguay, India, South Africa, Uruguay, Australia, Mexico, Romania, the Philippines and Spain.
Of the total biotech area in the world, 55% was in US. In Brazil, the growth was most dramatic, 88% to reach 23 million acres, 10% of the world biotech acerage. India was not far behind with a three fold growth from 1.24 million acres in 2004 to 3.2 million acres in Bt Cotton in 2005, having a share of 1.4% in the world biotech acres.
Amit Sachdev
Representative
U S Grains Council, India
bluecross303@gmail.com
Jan 14, 2006
In the second week of the new year, the commodity prices in India were on the rise and it seems the prices will not come down in the near future. For Barley the week started with an average price of Rs.8900 ($200) per MT at the market yard and by the mid week had reached Rs.9211 ($207) per MT at the market yard.
Corn (Maize) average price was Rs.5851 ($131.5) per MT which by mid week had reached Rs.5940 ($133.5) per MT and remained the same till the end of the week. In the second week of January 2004, the average price was Rs.5492 ($123.5) per MT, i.e., the price this week is higher by about 8.3% than last year. The prices in production areas like Bihar and UP are showing an abnormal trend of increasing too fast. Bihar local prices were at a high of Rs.5918 ($133) per MT while prices in UP were at a high of Rs.6360 ($143) per MT and most of the end users in North India were buying corn at a price of Rs.7500 per MT ($168) per MT delivered to there plant sites.
The market prices in Gujarat are touching Rs.6096 ($137) per MT. The end users are receiving maize at Rs.7000 ($157 per MT).
Future prices of corn in India are also reported to be higher at $126 for Jan, $126 for Feb, $131 for Mar and $133 for Apr. Spot prices in Nizamabad were $126 while in Dawangere the prices were reported at $118 per MT.
Corn closed at CBOT at $83.83 per MT a little lower than last weeks close of $84.4 per MT. The FOB value is close to $104 per MT.
In the current scenario, when Indian corn prices are high, it is getting difficult for poultry and starch users to keep up with the prices, but they will have to live with these highs as the prices are likely to remain high till the end of March until the new crops arrives in Bihar and Tamil Nadu. The prices can be expected to go up again in April 2006 and continue to rise until the new crop arrives in Oct 2006.
2005 – A Year of successes for Plant and Animal Biotechnology
The year 2005 was a year of successes when biotechnology completed a decade of commercialization and the billionth acre was planned in the year 2005. The year also saw the mapping of rice and dog genomes and major projects to sequence the genomes of corn, soybean and sheep were announced. In 2005, a major contribution on nutrient enhanced research also came from Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation by way of a $36.8 million grant. The grant will enable focused research on improving nutrition and health through biotech-improved bananas, cassava, rice and sorghum.
As per a release from Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO), other consumer benefits included:
1. Kellogs announcement of using low-linolenic acid soybean oil to reduce trans fats in several of its products.
2. Development of an improved cress having omega-3 fatty acids which reduce the risk of heart disease.
3. Research continued on edible vaccines with development og biotech potato with Hepatitis B vaccine, a biotech tomato with SARS vaccine.
4. Japanese researchers developed a biotech soybean that contains a product that will promote hair growth and prevent hair loss caused by Chemotherapy.
Over the year International organization continued their support to biotechnology and highlighted the benefits of biotechnology:
• The World Health Organization (WHO) reported that biotech foods can “contribute to enhancing human health and development.” The study found that biotech foods can increase crop yield, food quality, and the diversity of foods which can be grown in a given area, and lead to better health and nutrition, and thereby raise health and living standards.
• A report issued by USDA’s Economic Research Service (ERS) and Rutgers University also found that large farms and small-scale farmers in southern Africa can benefit from planting biotech corn. The report found that yields on large farmers increased about 11 percent, and yields for small farms increased anywhere from seven to 56 percent, when biotech corn was planted.
• A National Center for Food and Agriculture Policy (NCFAP) study found that the 118 million acres of biotech crops U.S. farmers planted in 2004 increased food production by 6.6 billion pounds, and provided $2.3 billion in additional net returns for U.S. growers. Biotech crops also reduced pesticide use by an additional 34 percent, or 15.6 million pounds.
• The British research firm PG Economics Ltd. found that the global use of biotechnology-derived crops has added $27 billion to farm income and greatly reduced agriculture’s negative impacts upon the environment.
• An April, Science published a study by researchers at Rutgers University and the University of California, Davis who found that biotech rice in China could decrease farmer’s production costs, increase harvest yields, reduce the use of pesticides by as much as 80 percent, and improve farmer health. The study also estimated that if “90 percent of the farmers plant [biotech] rice, the annual agricultural income of China will increase by $4 billion.”
• A study by the University of Connecticut and Japan’s Kagoshima Prefectural Cattle Breeding Development Institute found that meat and milk products from cloned cattle are safe for consumption. The results reiterate those found by the National Academy of Science in 2001.
After a decade of commercialization, driven by farmer demand, the growth in biotech crop has continued. In 2005 the growth was 11%, despite the obstacles raised by many NGO’s. As per ISAAA’s report, 250,000 new farmers in four new countries planted biotech crops in 2005. In 1996 the biotech crop area was 4.2 million acres in 6 countries, which in 2005 soared to 222 million acres in 21 countries, an increase of 52 times.
New additions in 2005 included, Iran which, grew its first crop of biotech rice, the first biotech planting of this important food crop globally. The Czech Republic which, planted Bt maize for the first time.
There are now five EU countries growing biotech crops, Spain, Germany, France, Portugal and the Czech Republic. The trend is likely to continue
Of the 21 countries that are planting biotech crops, 14 have the “mega-country” status by planting 125,000 acres of more, as per ISAAA. The countries include United States, Argentina, Brazil, Canada, China, Paraguay, India, South Africa, Uruguay, Australia, Mexico, Romania, the Philippines and Spain.
Of the total biotech area in the world, 55% was in US. In Brazil, the growth was most dramatic, 88% to reach 23 million acres, 10% of the world biotech acerage. India was not far behind with a three fold growth from 1.24 million acres in 2004 to 3.2 million acres in Bt Cotton in 2005, having a share of 1.4% in the world biotech acres.
Amit Sachdev
Representative
U S Grains Council, India
bluecross303@gmail.com
Jan 14, 2006
Saturday, January 07, 2006
Commodity situation; New year ushers new food safety rules; Bio-security and Avian Influenza
Commodity situation
The commodity price in the year 2006 started on a high note, with barley prices in the market yard touching a high of Rs.9200 ($204) per ton. The delivered price worked out to about Rs.10575 ($235) per ton. By mid week the prices had slid to Rs.8900 ($198) per ton at the market yard on quality concerns, but by the end of the week the market had again risen to Rs.9200 ($204) per ton.
Maize also started on a high note with the red and the hybrid yellow varieties touching Rs.6400 ($142) at the market yard. The delivered prices worked out to be Rs.7500 ($166) in the northern belts. The prices remained high even in mid week. The spot prices in Nizamabad and Davangere were Rs.5540 ($123) and Rs.5290 ($118) per ton respectively. What was more surprising this week was a price of Rs.5895 ($135) per MT in Bihar. Prices in Andhra Pradesh also touched an all time high of Rs.6840 ($152) and this could be an anomaly and will need to be watched. The average price for corn this week was Rs.5850 ($130) per ton, which in the first week of Jan 2005 was Rs.5200 ($115), an increase of 13.5% over last year.
The prices in US slipped down a wee bit from $85 per ton at CBOT on Dec 30, 2005 to $84.41 per ton on Jan 06, 2006. The FOB price for corn (US gulf) was $104 per ton.
Going by the world situation, one needs to look at only two countries – India and China collectively having 38% of the world’s population (17.46% in India and 20.63% in China). The two countries have a growing middle class, whose demand for not only food including milk, meat and eggs, but also gold etc is increasing. The two countries with growing economies are creating a huge demand for raw materials including agriculture commodities and this demand is capable of influencing prices not only the in local markets, but also the international markets.
Reports available for Rabi plantings till Dec 30, 2005 show that the land under wheat and barley is up from last year by 0.86% and 6.36% respectively, Land under Maize (Corn) and Jowar (Sorghum) is down from last year by 2.77% and 2.55% respectively.
New year ushers new food safety rules
The New Year ushered new food safety rules all over the world. In EU it is the Food Hygiene Regulations, in US it is the labelling requirements, while in United Kingdom, it is the labelling of use of water retention agents in chilled or frozen poultry. The food companies will be under tougher regulatory regime and scrutiny, which will ensure better compliance on one hand, but also is better for the consumer.
The EU Food Hygiene Regulation will apply at every point in the food chain, in line with the EU's “farm to fork” approach to regulation. The new legislation puts the primary responsibility on all food and feed operators, from farmers and processors to retailers and caterers, to ensure that food on the market meets the required safety standards. Consumers benefit and can be confident that the best possible food safety practices have been applied and scrutinized at every step in the production chain.
Under the food hygiene legislation, the onus is placed on food operators to ensure that food reaching consumers is safe and they will need to apply compulsory self-checking programmes and follow the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) principles in all sectors of the food industry, other than at the farm level.
All food operators will have to be registered and will need to follow the new rules for microbiological criteria, which is aimed at reducing food-borne diseases. Microbiological criteria are set for certain bacteria, such as salmonella and listeria in the main food categories. The categories include meat and meat products, fish, milk and dairy products, ready-to-eat foods, along with fruit and vegetables.
Food operators will be responsible for ensuring that the criteria are met at a specific point of the food chain determined in the regulation. National authorities must verify that food companies are complying with the rules.
Feed businesses will have a primary responsibility for ensuring the safety of products put on the market. They will also have to apply the HACCP self-assessment principles, keep records of production and marketing, be registered with the national authorities and undergo mandatory training.
In the US a new federal law, which went into effect on January 1, requires U.S. food processors to list the amount of trans-fatty acids contained in their products.
Trans-fatty acids, a synthetic fat, enhance the flavor and extend shelf-life of certain foods. Medical experts believe that trans-fatty acids contribute to cardiovascular disease in humans by raising blood concentrations of cholesterol-containing low-density lipoproteins.
The biggest regulatory change for the processors in 2006 will be the move by some companies provide nutrition labels on their meat products. The labels would contain basic nutritional information about fresh meat, including protein, carbohydrates, and the various fat contents, and will demonstrate to consumers that consuming meat is an important part of a balanced diet.
Although the labels were not mandatory until 2008, many companies will start labelling on a voluntary basis in US.
In United Kingdom the Food Standards Agency is stepping up enforcement actions against domestic poultry processors who fail to follow the labelling rules on use of water-retention agents in chilled and frozen poultry. US already has a law, wherein water retained by the chilled or frozen poultry has to be mentioned on the label.
All these laws help in making the consumers aware about what they consume and if the same is safe for consumption.
Bio-security and Avian Influenza
As two more deaths are reported due to AI in the world and that too outside Asia (in Turkey), the concerns on the spread of the virus are rising. But the question still remains if the world will face an AI pandemic or we will have to live in the fear. Most believe that Avian Influenza virus is only causing a fear psychosis and creating panic amongst the consumers. The AI virus can be dealt with proper bio-security & safe handling of meat products.
Bio-security embodies all the cumulative measures that can or should be taken to keep disease (viruses, bacteria, fungi, protozoa, parasites), from a farm and to prevent the transmission of disease (by humans, insects, rodents, and wild birds/animals) within an infected farm to neighbouring farms.
Bio-security should be considered as an investment and not an expense and
• Bio-security is a team effort and a shared responsibility
• Bio-security should be an ongoing process and must be followed at all times
• Each step should be carried out judiciously to effectively reduced disease contamination
• Optimum bio-security measures need to be developed and implemented to help both disease prevention and control
• The mark of a good bio-security program is to maximize the health of a flock and minimize the risk of disease spread
• Insure the production of a clean product
As per Centre for Disease Control, “There is no evidence that any human cases of avian influenza have been acquired by eating poultry products.”
As per World Health Organization (WHO), “To date there is no epidemiological information to suggest that the disease can be transmitted through contaminated food or that products shipped from affected areas have been the source of infection in humans.”
As per Swayneet, al, JAVMA in 2003 “The virulence of H5 and H7 viruses in chickens does not correlate with their ability to infect and cause disease in humans.
The major sources for any disease are
• Humans – Hands, hair, clothing, footwear
• Contaminated equipment
• Wild birds – crow, duck, sparrow, goose etc
• Pets – Cats and dogs
• Improperly disposed carcasses
• Backyard flocks and live markets
And the same is true for the spread of Avian Influenza virus. Proper bio-security components must be taken into consideration
• Isolation
• Traffic Control
• Sanitation – Cleaning & Disinfection (C&D)
• Rodent & Insect Control
The barriers to AI in food manufacture are
• Anti Mortem / Post Mortem inspection at the plant
• Zero tolerance for faeces on the carcasses
• Discarding of head, trachea, lungs & intestines
• Antimicrobial carcass wash
• Refrigeration/freezing has little effect
• Cooking – ready-to-eat products
As per WHO, “…good hygiene practices during handling of raw poultry meat and usual recommended cooking practices for poultry products would lower any potential risk to insignificant levels.”
Proper systems at farms, processing plants and proper regulation must be adhered to. The consumers must be made aware should be able to make informed decisions regarding purchase of meat and meat products. It will make the consumers confident that what they are getting from the companies is safe for consumption. It could be a self regulated, voluntary system, which will benefit the consumer and the processor.
In the US there is a move to voluntarily test commercial flocks for Avian Influenza. There are an estimated 150,000 flocks in the US and 11 birds from each flock will be tested, making a total of 1.6 million birds to be tested. US in the year 2005 produced 9.5 billion birds. The move will create confidence among the consumers of processed poultry meat.
Amit Sachdev
Representative
U S Grains Council, India
bluecross303@gmail.com
Jan 07, 2006
The commodity price in the year 2006 started on a high note, with barley prices in the market yard touching a high of Rs.9200 ($204) per ton. The delivered price worked out to about Rs.10575 ($235) per ton. By mid week the prices had slid to Rs.8900 ($198) per ton at the market yard on quality concerns, but by the end of the week the market had again risen to Rs.9200 ($204) per ton.
Maize also started on a high note with the red and the hybrid yellow varieties touching Rs.6400 ($142) at the market yard. The delivered prices worked out to be Rs.7500 ($166) in the northern belts. The prices remained high even in mid week. The spot prices in Nizamabad and Davangere were Rs.5540 ($123) and Rs.5290 ($118) per ton respectively. What was more surprising this week was a price of Rs.5895 ($135) per MT in Bihar. Prices in Andhra Pradesh also touched an all time high of Rs.6840 ($152) and this could be an anomaly and will need to be watched. The average price for corn this week was Rs.5850 ($130) per ton, which in the first week of Jan 2005 was Rs.5200 ($115), an increase of 13.5% over last year.
The prices in US slipped down a wee bit from $85 per ton at CBOT on Dec 30, 2005 to $84.41 per ton on Jan 06, 2006. The FOB price for corn (US gulf) was $104 per ton.
Going by the world situation, one needs to look at only two countries – India and China collectively having 38% of the world’s population (17.46% in India and 20.63% in China). The two countries have a growing middle class, whose demand for not only food including milk, meat and eggs, but also gold etc is increasing. The two countries with growing economies are creating a huge demand for raw materials including agriculture commodities and this demand is capable of influencing prices not only the in local markets, but also the international markets.
Reports available for Rabi plantings till Dec 30, 2005 show that the land under wheat and barley is up from last year by 0.86% and 6.36% respectively, Land under Maize (Corn) and Jowar (Sorghum) is down from last year by 2.77% and 2.55% respectively.
New year ushers new food safety rules
The New Year ushered new food safety rules all over the world. In EU it is the Food Hygiene Regulations, in US it is the labelling requirements, while in United Kingdom, it is the labelling of use of water retention agents in chilled or frozen poultry. The food companies will be under tougher regulatory regime and scrutiny, which will ensure better compliance on one hand, but also is better for the consumer.
The EU Food Hygiene Regulation will apply at every point in the food chain, in line with the EU's “farm to fork” approach to regulation. The new legislation puts the primary responsibility on all food and feed operators, from farmers and processors to retailers and caterers, to ensure that food on the market meets the required safety standards. Consumers benefit and can be confident that the best possible food safety practices have been applied and scrutinized at every step in the production chain.
Under the food hygiene legislation, the onus is placed on food operators to ensure that food reaching consumers is safe and they will need to apply compulsory self-checking programmes and follow the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) principles in all sectors of the food industry, other than at the farm level.
All food operators will have to be registered and will need to follow the new rules for microbiological criteria, which is aimed at reducing food-borne diseases. Microbiological criteria are set for certain bacteria, such as salmonella and listeria in the main food categories. The categories include meat and meat products, fish, milk and dairy products, ready-to-eat foods, along with fruit and vegetables.
Food operators will be responsible for ensuring that the criteria are met at a specific point of the food chain determined in the regulation. National authorities must verify that food companies are complying with the rules.
Feed businesses will have a primary responsibility for ensuring the safety of products put on the market. They will also have to apply the HACCP self-assessment principles, keep records of production and marketing, be registered with the national authorities and undergo mandatory training.
In the US a new federal law, which went into effect on January 1, requires U.S. food processors to list the amount of trans-fatty acids contained in their products.
Trans-fatty acids, a synthetic fat, enhance the flavor and extend shelf-life of certain foods. Medical experts believe that trans-fatty acids contribute to cardiovascular disease in humans by raising blood concentrations of cholesterol-containing low-density lipoproteins.
The biggest regulatory change for the processors in 2006 will be the move by some companies provide nutrition labels on their meat products. The labels would contain basic nutritional information about fresh meat, including protein, carbohydrates, and the various fat contents, and will demonstrate to consumers that consuming meat is an important part of a balanced diet.
Although the labels were not mandatory until 2008, many companies will start labelling on a voluntary basis in US.
In United Kingdom the Food Standards Agency is stepping up enforcement actions against domestic poultry processors who fail to follow the labelling rules on use of water-retention agents in chilled and frozen poultry. US already has a law, wherein water retained by the chilled or frozen poultry has to be mentioned on the label.
All these laws help in making the consumers aware about what they consume and if the same is safe for consumption.
Bio-security and Avian Influenza
As two more deaths are reported due to AI in the world and that too outside Asia (in Turkey), the concerns on the spread of the virus are rising. But the question still remains if the world will face an AI pandemic or we will have to live in the fear. Most believe that Avian Influenza virus is only causing a fear psychosis and creating panic amongst the consumers. The AI virus can be dealt with proper bio-security & safe handling of meat products.
Bio-security embodies all the cumulative measures that can or should be taken to keep disease (viruses, bacteria, fungi, protozoa, parasites), from a farm and to prevent the transmission of disease (by humans, insects, rodents, and wild birds/animals) within an infected farm to neighbouring farms.
Bio-security should be considered as an investment and not an expense and
• Bio-security is a team effort and a shared responsibility
• Bio-security should be an ongoing process and must be followed at all times
• Each step should be carried out judiciously to effectively reduced disease contamination
• Optimum bio-security measures need to be developed and implemented to help both disease prevention and control
• The mark of a good bio-security program is to maximize the health of a flock and minimize the risk of disease spread
• Insure the production of a clean product
As per Centre for Disease Control, “There is no evidence that any human cases of avian influenza have been acquired by eating poultry products.”
As per World Health Organization (WHO), “To date there is no epidemiological information to suggest that the disease can be transmitted through contaminated food or that products shipped from affected areas have been the source of infection in humans.”
As per Swayneet, al, JAVMA in 2003 “The virulence of H5 and H7 viruses in chickens does not correlate with their ability to infect and cause disease in humans.
The major sources for any disease are
• Humans – Hands, hair, clothing, footwear
• Contaminated equipment
• Wild birds – crow, duck, sparrow, goose etc
• Pets – Cats and dogs
• Improperly disposed carcasses
• Backyard flocks and live markets
And the same is true for the spread of Avian Influenza virus. Proper bio-security components must be taken into consideration
• Isolation
• Traffic Control
• Sanitation – Cleaning & Disinfection (C&D)
• Rodent & Insect Control
The barriers to AI in food manufacture are
• Anti Mortem / Post Mortem inspection at the plant
• Zero tolerance for faeces on the carcasses
• Discarding of head, trachea, lungs & intestines
• Antimicrobial carcass wash
• Refrigeration/freezing has little effect
• Cooking – ready-to-eat products
As per WHO, “…good hygiene practices during handling of raw poultry meat and usual recommended cooking practices for poultry products would lower any potential risk to insignificant levels.”
Proper systems at farms, processing plants and proper regulation must be adhered to. The consumers must be made aware should be able to make informed decisions regarding purchase of meat and meat products. It will make the consumers confident that what they are getting from the companies is safe for consumption. It could be a self regulated, voluntary system, which will benefit the consumer and the processor.
In the US there is a move to voluntarily test commercial flocks for Avian Influenza. There are an estimated 150,000 flocks in the US and 11 birds from each flock will be tested, making a total of 1.6 million birds to be tested. US in the year 2005 produced 9.5 billion birds. The move will create confidence among the consumers of processed poultry meat.
Amit Sachdev
Representative
U S Grains Council, India
bluecross303@gmail.com
Jan 07, 2006
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)