Podcast: An update on the Nebraska legislative session

In this podcast, Mick Mines, the registered lobbyist for the Nebraska Corn Growers Association, gives an update on the state legislative session in Lincoln.

In the report, recorded a couple weeks ago, Mines noted the passage of LB229, a bill that sets up funding for the Water Resources Cash Fund. He said NeCGA was committed to finding a more comprehensive funding mechanism for the Water Resources Cash Fund that brought together support from all Nebraska stakeholders, including the Nebraska Environmental Trust.

This was accomplished only by the leadership of several Senators, he said, and was one of the corn growers key legislative priorities for the year. (For more on the LB229, click here.)

Mines also briefly discusses the state budget and other measures of interest to corn growers this year.

Nebraska Corn Kernel podcasts are also available on iTunes! Click here to subscribe.

Cooking pork is cooler than ever

When you order a pork chop from a nice restaurant, they don’t ask how you want it cooked.

But that has changed as pork producers across the nation are welcoming the news that the USDA has officially lowered the recommended cooking temperature for pork to 145 degrees Fahrenheit, followed by a three-minute rest time before you cut it. This means pork will now be held to the same standard as the other red meats: beef, veal and lamb.

How did this come about? The new recommendation evolved from a 2007 Pork Checkoff-funded research project conducted by Ohio State University to measure consumer eating preferences. As part of that project the university researchers tested how various end-cooking temperatures affected eating preferences. But the researchers needed to know if temperatures below 160 degrees would be safe if that turned out to be consumers' preference.

That question resulted in a Checkoff-funded research project to conduct a risk assessment to evaluate any food-safety implications of cooking temperatures within a range of 145-160 degrees Fahrenheit.

The risk assessment found that cooking pork to an internal temperature of 145 degrees was equivalent to cooking pork to 160 degrees. Checkoff-funded research conducted by Texas A&M supports the fact that meat temperature continues to rise after being removed from the heat and the reality that "resting time" between cooking and eating is at least that long. Therefore, USDA’s Food Safety Inspection Service (FSIS) agreed that the cooking temperature for pork could be lowered.

"Our consumer research has consistently shown that Americans have a tendency to overcook common cuts of pork, resulting in a less-than-optimal eating experience," said Dianne Bettin, a pork producer from Truman, Minn., and chair of the Checkoff's Domestic Marketing Committee. "The new guidelines will help consumers enjoy pork at its most flavorful, juicy - and safe - temperature."

The revised recommendation applies to pork whole-muscle cuts, such as loin, chops and roasts. Ground pork, like all ground meat, should be cooked to 160 degrees Fahrenheit. Regardless of cut or cooking method, both the USDA and National Pork Board recommend using a digital cooking thermometer to ensure an accurate final temperature.

"It's great news that home cooks can now feel confident to enjoy medium-rare pork, like they do with other meats," said Guy Fieri, a chef, restaurateur and host of several food-focused television programs. "Pork cooked to this temperature will be juicy and tender. The foodservice industry has been following this pork cooking standard for nearly 10 years."

The new recommendation reflects advances in both food safety and nutritional content of pork in recent years. On average, most common cuts of pork are 16 percent leaner than 20 years ago, and saturated fat has dropped 27 percent. In fact, pork tenderloin is now as lean as the leanest type of chicken - a skinless chicken breast.

Additional information about cooking pork, including recipes, is available at PorkBeInspired.com, or Facebook.com/PorkBeInspired.

Nebraska corn 94% planted, 55% emerged

The U.S. Department of Agriculture said yesterday that 94 percent of Nebraska's corn crop was planted and 55 percent of the corn had emerged. A year ago at this time Nebraska farmers had 95 percent of the crop in and 56 percent had emerged. The five year average is 95 percent planted and 61 percent emerged.

Nationally, USDA said 79 percent of the corn crop is planted, up from last week’s 63 percent but still behind the five-year average of 87 percent planted by this date. Some key states like Iowa (98 percent planted) and Illinois (90 percent planted) are nearly wrapped up. Minnesota caught up considerably, jumping to 81 percent planted (up from 47 percent). Ohio, meanwhile, is only 11 percent planted.

USDA said 45 percent of planted corn across the country had emerged, and while that's a nice jump from from last weeks 21 percent, it's still behind the five-year average of 59 percent.

The Nebraska Corn Board's Crop Progress Update noted that the National Agricultural Statistics Service's Nebraska Field Office reported significant rainfall in Nebraska and below average temperatures across the state for the week ending May 22. It also noted that crop and pasture conditions improved with the recent rains, although heavy rains caused localized flooding and soil erosion in isolated areas.

The top photo this week comes from the Holdrege FFA Chapter, while the bottom one comes from the SEM FFA Chapter. They are part of the Nebraska Corn Board's 2011 crop progress photo set on Flickr.

Be sure to check out more photos and details of the crop year at the Board's Crop Progress Update page.

'Pumped' for new ethanol choices

Story from News 2, North Platte, Nebraska - Watch the video by clicking here.

Nebraska's corn farmers are pumped about the new ethanol choice in southwest Nebraska.

In Ogallala, the first gas station to offer four different blends of ethanol based gasoline offered fuel at a fraction of the cost to its customers today.

For Mike Leitz filling his gas tank for $24.47 was a welcome relief.

He makes a special trip to this gas station in Ogallala from his home in Brule.

He says there are many closer and more convenient stations for him but this is one of the few stations where he can get E-85, an 85 percent blend of gasoline.

“Then that way if the price of E-85 is cheap enough where I can fill up a tank then I will go for it,” said Mike Leitz, Brule.

As petroleum prices surge toward $4 a gallon, the federal government says it's going to provide grants and loans to station owners who install E-85 pumps.

“Ethanol is by nature and in many cases twenty cents below the price of regular fuel. In these days of higher priced petroleum fuel ethanol is that much more of a cost savings to consumers,” said Jon Holzfaster, NE Corn Board.

Those in the industry think government incentives will help ensure more flex fuel pumps are installed across the nation in the coming years.

“You can burn a blend all the way up to E-85 and that would be depended upon what you choose to use depending on your type of driving and the type of vehicle you drive,” said Holzfaster.

That's good news for drivers like Mike.

“You burn a little bit more with E-85 but overall it is a savings,” he said.

Nebraska Corn Growers welcome funding mechanism for Water Resources Cash Fund

Governor Dave Heineman has signed LB229, a move welcomed by the Nebraska Corn Growers Association. The bill creates a funding mechanism for the Water Resources Cash Fund.

“Developing a balanced funding mechanism for the Water Resources Cash Fund was one of the Nebraska Corn Growers Association’s priorities heading into the current legislative session,” said NeCGA president Carl Sousek, a farmer from Prague, in a news release. “We are thankful to Senators Chris Langemeier, Deb Fischer, Tom Carlson and Ken Schilz for providing leadership on this important issue, and appreciate Governor Heineman signing the measure.”

The Nebraska Corn Growers said its membership believes the Water Resources Cash Fund is an obligation of the entire state because water issues impact all of Nebraska. As such, contributions to the fund should be broader than just agriculture or rural communities and instead include all stakeholders.

“We were committed to working with all stakeholder groups to develop an equitable funding mechanism and believe LB229 is a well-balanced approach,” he said.

LB229 allows for the Nebraska Department of Natural Resources to apply to the Environmental Trust Fund for a $3.3 million grant each year for three years for the Water Resources Cash Fund. Each annual grant would then be matched by the state’s general fund. If benchmarks are met, the DNR can apply for a second three-year grant funding cycle.

“The signed bill will allow the Water Resources Cash Fund to support water-focused projects in fully appropriated basins while also keeping the Environmental Trust Fund’s grant process in place,” Sousek said.

The Nebraska Corn Growers also support LR218, which will create a task force to review and make recommendations for a longer-term, sustainable funding mechanism for the Water Resources Cash Fund.

“We will take an active role in the task force, and we are pleased to work with other stakeholders to address this issue as a state-wide investment,” Sousek said. “The Nebraska Corn Growers Association and corn farmers are appreciative of the progress made in addressing water issues and look forward to further discussions that will, long-term, benefit everyone.”

Another chamber votes to oppose organizations like HSUS

The Kearney Chamber of Commerce approved a resolution this week that supports current livestock production practices, animal husbandry and regulations for humane treatment of food production animals. In essence, the chamber voted to oppose organizations like the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) that threaten ballot initiatives if their own set of animal care standards are not adopted.

The chamber also pledged to support "the livestock and agriculture industry and oppose any current or future actions by organizations that would work to eliminate livestock for food production, harming our economy and way of life," as reported in the Kearney Hub.

This is the second chamber of commerce in Nebraska to approve that sort of language, as the Hastings Chamber of Commerce adopted a similar resolution in April.

At that time, Tom Hastings, president of the Hastings Chamber of Commerce, told Brownfield, "With talking and finding out some of the things that this organization [HSUS] had done in other states, we just felt that we needed to be proactive in taking a stance against some of the actions and some of the things that they have been trying to do. Especially because agriculture is the number-one industry in the state of Nebraska." (For a report from KHAS-TV, click here.)

Jan Rodehorst, executive director of the Kearney Chamber, told the Hub that chamber members have talked about a statement of support for the past few months and that discussions relating to the issue occurred at meetings with other chambers. Nebraska Gov. Dave Heineman has also been vocal on the issue.

“The Humane Society of the United States is anti-agriculture and they’re out to destroy animal agriculture – and if they want to come to Nebraska, we’re going to fight them and we’re going to beat them,” Heineman told Brownfield in December. “Agriculture is the number one industry in this state. It’s what makes our economy so strong. I’m going to stand tall and this is a fight we won’t shy away from.” He did a similar interview with KRVN.


For a collection of previous posts on HSUS, click here.

Ethanol plays key role in fuel supply, helps lower prices

Want to pay nearly $100 to fill up your 15-gallon gas tank? You would if ethanol were removed from the market, according to a report (.pdf) by Xiaodong Du and Dermot J. Hayes at the Center for Agricultural and Rural Development at Iowa State University.

They said if ethanol production came to an immediate halt, under a very wide range of parameters, the estimated gasoline price increase would be of "historic proportions," ranging from 41 to 92 percent. At today's prices you'd be looking at $5.60-$7.60 per gallon gas without ethanol.

Economists are already concerned what $100 oil and $4 gas is doing to the economy. Just imagine the impact of $6.50 per gallon – or $97.50 for a 15-gallon fill up!

The researchers also looked at the impact of ethanol on fuel prices for 2010.

The more than 13 billion gallons of ethanol in the marketplace last year saved motorists, on average across the country, 89 cents per gallon in 2010. The lowest impact regionally was 58 cents per gallon in the East Coast, while motorists in the Midwest saved $1.37 per gallon (that's more than $20 for each 15-gallon fill-up). 

Considering oil and gas prices are higher this year than last, it will be interesting to see of the researchers will do an update using 2011 figures...certainly the savings numbers would be even more.

In addition to looking at just 2010, the researchers also looked at numbers from January 2000 to December 2010. For that 11-year period, the growth in ethanol production reduced wholesale gasoline prices by 25 cents per gallon on average across the country. Regionally, the Midwest saw the biggest impact, with a 39 cent per gallon reduction over that time period, while the East Coast had the smallest impact at 16 cents gallon.

The smaller impact over the 11-year period makes sense because if you look back to 2000, only 1.6 billion gallons of ethanol were produced – a very small percentage of the total fuel market. Ethanol production didn't surpass 2 billion gallons until 2002 and pass 6 billion gallons until 2007 and 10 billion gallons until 2009. The 13+ billion gallons of ethanol produced last year is about 10 percent of our fuel supply – and without we'd really see some pain at the pump.

Farming a blog

Blogs are becoming widespread to a group of people we often like to write about: farmers!

Farmers in Nebraska, like Randy Uhrmacher, are using social media to interact with his customers – or “anyone that eats” – like he says on his blog, Cornfrmr: Random thoughts of a Nebraska corn/soybean farmer. Randy also has a farm Facebook page and twitter account (@Cornfrmr) that he share messages, pictures and updates about his life on the farm – and even being NASCAR fan.

Randy does a great job at sharing not only pictures of planting and equipment, but the true issues that surround agriculture today. He recently blogged about things we take for granted, like tires, to put food on the table, and another blog faces the anti-ag issues surrounding modern agriculture production.

Another Nebraska farmer, Ryan Weeks, is a fifth generation family farmer who blogs about his farm and raising the world’s food, feed, fiber and fuel on the same acreage settled by his great-great grandparents in 1892, on his is blog, Days of the Weeks.

Ryan also has a farm Facebook page and twitter account (@HuskerFarm). He shows some great pictures and explains why they do what they do on their farm, as well as other media, like podcast interviews on the advantages of autosteer and other technology.

I'm sure Randy and Ryan could tell you more about their positive experiences of using social media to educate consumers and producers alike. What are you doing to share your farm story?

Podcast: South Korean and other trade deals are good for agriculture

In this podcast, Greg Whitmore (@SustainableGreg), a farmer from Shelby and member of the Nebraska Corn Growers Association, notes that South Korea is one of the top five corn export markets for the United States and is a potential growth market for corn co-products like distillers grains.

"The Korean market is very valuable to U.S. corn farmers and we fully support the pending free trade agreement with Korea and have appreciated recent progress on this and other trade agreements," he said.

The FTA with South Korea provides that both feed corn and distillers grains receive immediate duty-free treatment. In addition, tariffs on all refined corn products will eventually be phased out, creating new market access for corn sweeteners and corn oil. The agreement also provides immediate market access for exports of corn starch.

"Just as important, though, the Korean FTA provides for significantly improved market access for beef, pork and other livestock products," Whitmore said. "This increases opportunities for Nebraska beef and pork producers and all those who raise livestock."

He also discusses the pending trade agreement with Columbia and the benefits it would bring – plus the potential of the pending deal with Panama and the Trans Pacific Partnership, a trade pact that includes several countries in the Pacific.

"These and other trade deals help ensure all U.S. ag sectors have access to markets," he said. "They also help ensure food and ag goods move more freely around the world, which is good for consumers because in the end they’ll have more reliable access to them."

Nebraska Corn Kernel podcasts are also available on iTunes! Click here to subscribe.

Big Oil defends tax breaks, massive profits

Big Oil was called before Congress yesterday to talk about high gas prices – but they spent their time defending the billions in tax breaks/credits/subsidies the industry gets courtesy of U.S. taxpayers. While mostly for show, the testimony was important to put Big Oil on the record in saying that after a century it apparently still needs government tax breaks to be successful.

While it is generally believed a bill to eliminate a stack of these tax breaks won't make it anywhere, Big Oil felt it needed to defend itself and, not surprisingly, everyone was on the same well-oiled page. ExxonMobile's CEO called the tax proposal "misinformed," "discriminatory" and "counterproductive." (Exxon, fyi, had profits of $11 billion in the first quarter of this year.)

I wonder what he has to say about incentives for the biofuels industry? And how are biofuels suppose to work their way into the system when like Big Oil controls the markets, dollars and reaps so much in terms of a tax advantage?

Of course the American Petroleum Institute (which supports tar sands oil but files lawsuits to prevent increased use of biofuels) is running TV ads trying to scare Americans into believing that "now is not the time to raise energy taxes" – and without directly saying so, essentially arguing that eliminating tax breaks for Big Oil is the same thing as raising taxes. Yet immediately eliminating the Volumetric Ethanol Excise Tax Credit (VEETC) for biofuels would do EXACTLY the same thing!

The difference is, Big Oil essentially has a monopoly on our fuel supply. Biofuels like ethanol are helping to change that. It will take time and perseverance – and the continued defense of myths and outright lies perpetuated online – but dropping the push for biofuels would be a giant step backward for the United States.

Yesterday, the Nebraska Corn Board distributed a news release that dealt a bit on the subject.

It noted that oil is in everything one way or another – from gas tanks to packaging to transporting to fabric to food – and high energy costs also significantly increase the cost of production no matter what’s being produced, from widgets to breakfast cereal.

“We’ve had very high oil prices for much of this year, and we’re all seeing it at the pump,” said Kim Clark of the Nebraska Corn Board. “Yet we’re also seeing the impact of higher energy costs in every transaction in every store because high oil prices have an impact at every step in the process for just about everything we buy. It’s taking dollars away from families and slowing our economic recovery.”

High oil prices also mean soaring profits for global oil companies – Exxon saw profits rise to $11 billion, up 69 percent from last year. Shell was up 22 percent, Chevron up 36 percent, ConocoPhillips jumped 43 percent and even BP, which is still paying for the massive oil spill in the Gulf, saw gains of 16 percent and $7.2 billion in earnings. Profits rival those in 2008 when oil hit $147 and Exxon earned more than $45 billion, more than any publicly traded company in history.

“Despite massive profits year after year, many of which go overseas, the oil industry continues to fight to keep U.S. tax breaks, tax credits and other subsidies, some of which have been in place for nearly a century, not to mention the military cost of keeping shipping lanes open,” Clark said. “How many decades do these companies need government support? Certainly we should consider the oil industry well established and able to stand on its own.”

At the same time, the oil industry and its many offshoot organizations continue to bemoan any incentives for biofuels. “They promote many myths and misinformation about biofuels like ethanol, and that is unfortunate because biofuels are our only hope of diversifying the fuel supply and producing more energy here at home,” Clark said. “Instead of being part of the solution, they continue to promote false ideas that only make us more dependent on oil, even if that oil comes from the Middle East.”