PDA

View Full Version : Remember when I said high fuel prices


Spider
08-15-2007, 02:24 PM
Leads to the cost of everything else , cause trucking companies will pass the cost off on to you the consumer , ....took longer then I expected but here ....
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/18902.html
Prices for key foods are rising sharply
By Kevin G. Hall | McClatchy Newspapers

* Posted on Tue, August 14, 2007

* email
* |
* print

tool name
close
tool goes here
Food prices on the rise

MCT

Food prices on the rise. | View larger image

MIDLAND, Va. — The Labor Department’s most recent inflation data showed that U.S. food prices rose by 4.1 percent for the 12 months ending in June, but a deeper look at the numbers reveals that the price of milk, eggs and other essentials in the American diet are actually rising by double digits.

Already stung by a two-year rise in gasoline prices, American consumers now face sharply higher prices for foods they can’t do without. This little-known fact may go a long way to explaining why, despite healthy job statistics, Americans remain glum about the economy.

Meeting with economic writers last week, President Bush dismissed several polls that show Americans are down on the economy. He expressed surprise that inflation is one of the stated concerns.

“They cite inflation?” Bush asked, adding that, “I happen to believe the war has clouded a lot of people's sense of optimism.”

But the inflation numbers reveal the extent to which lower- and middle-income Americans are being pinched.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics said in its June inflation report that egg prices are 19.5 percent higher than they were in June 2006. Over the same period, according to the department’s consumer price index, whole milk was up 13.3 percent; fresh chicken 10 percent; navel oranges 19.8 percent; apples 11.7 percent. Dried beans were up 11.5 percent, and white bread just missed double-digit growth, rising by 9.6 percent.

These numbers get lost in the broader inflation rate for all goods and services, which measured 2.7 for the same 12-month period. Across the economy, rising food prices were offset by falling prices for things bought at the mall: computers, cameras, clothing and shoes.

“All of that stuff is going down in price, but prices for gasoline have gotten higher, and food prices have gone up,” said Mark Vitner, a senior economist for Wachovia, a large national bank based in Charlotte, N.C.

People also go to the mall a lot less than they go to the grocery store, so they’re constantly reminded that dietary staples are up sharply.

Why are food prices rising?

It's partly because of corn prices, driven up by congressional mandates for ethanol production, which have reduced the amount of corn available for animal feed. It's also because of tougher immigration enforcement and a late spring freeze, which have made farm laborers scarcer and damaged fruit and vegetable crops, respectively. And it's because of higher diesel fuel costs to run tractors and attractive foreign markets that take U.S. production.

The Labor Department’s last detailed survey of consumer spending, in 2005, showed that Americans spent about 12.8 percent of their income on food. A bit more than 7 percent of their income was spent on food at home, and 5.7 percent was spent on food away from home.

These percentages suggest that higher food prices, while unwelcome, won’t break the bank for most consumers. But for retirees such as Jacqueline Wilson, 60, of Upper Marlboro, Md., rising food and fuel prices take a big bite out of fixed income. “I make every dollar count,” said Wilson, outside a Giant supermarket. “I cut back. … I get only as much as I need. I don’t buy it because it is 10 for $10, but so that I’m using it and not wasting my money.”

Asked about her view of the economy, she answered, “Terrible.”

In broad terms, the economy isn't terrible. Unemployment is near record lows, and the second quarter posted a strong 3.4 percent growth rate. But it is for those Americans who are pinched by rising food and gasoline costs, and that’s a lot of folks. Half the nation’s families earn below the median family income of about $56,000. Three-fifths of American families report income under $70,000.

At the Al-Mara farm in Midland, Va., Jeff and Patty Leonard run a large dairy operation where about 600 cows produce 19,000 pounds of milk each day. They plant about 1,000 acres of corn, so they don’t face all of the rising feed costs like some farmers. But they sympathize with consumers because the costs of nitrogen fertilizers and diesel fuel have all gone up sharply, raising production costs by nearly 30 percent.

“That’s how your farmer feels here at home when we’re trying to buy soybean meal, food for our cows and trying to maintain our equipment,” said Patty Leonard. “I can understand exactly what the shopper is going through.”

Milk prices aren’t set on the farm. That’s done by marketing cooperatives, which this year have been successful in passing on higher production costs after several dismal years of prices that took dairy farmers back to the 1970s.

“It’s pretty much a realignment of the actual value of milk in today’s dollar,” Patty Leonard said. “Milk has been cheap for a long, long time.”

Globalization also explains higher milk prices. Australia, a leading milk exporter, is struggling through a drought, and European governments are pulling back dairy subsidies. So U.S. farmers, aided by a weak dollar, are stepping in to meet growing demand for milk products in China and India. That’s pinched supply at home and abroad, driving up prices.

“U.S. per capita dairy consumption is the highest it’s been since 1987,” said Chris Galen, vice president of the National Milk Producers Federation, pointing to rising U.S. demand for cheese, made from milk. “Americans are eating more cheese than ever — not just volume but per capita.”

To make more milk, or raise more chickens that lay more eggs, farmers need feed corn and other feed products. But corn prices have soared over the past year as Congress pushes ethanol, a renewable fuel made from corn. Fields that previously grew soybeans are now yielding corn, and that’s driven up the price of soybeans as they become scarce.

Iowa State University’s Center for Agricultural and Rural Development shocked the farm sector earlier this summer with a report that corn farmers are expected to lock in prices of $4 a bushel through 2010, about double what corn fetched two years ago.

“You will probably be seeing these prices rise for quite a long time and stabilizing, maybe, but not going back to the $2-a-bushel corn,” said Jacinto Feitosa, co-director of the center in Ames, Iowa.

Garcia Bronco
08-15-2007, 02:32 PM
It's not just fuel...we can switch to whatever bio fuel we want, but the energy companies are still going to get theirs. All the bio fuel has done is make the cost of goods go up even more while being less efficent than regular gas.

cheese1
08-15-2007, 02:54 PM
Gouda

Hotrod
08-15-2007, 02:55 PM
IMO the problem is those damn drivers are way over paid..........;D

ak1971
08-15-2007, 02:56 PM
IMO the problem is those damn drivers are way over paid..........;D

no crap. If they would quit feeding the damn drivers and keep them in chains where they belong, everything would be fine

mosca
08-15-2007, 05:47 PM
I agree that high fuel prices are linked to rising prices elsewhere. I don't buy too much into the theory that higher prices of milk, eggs, fresh chicken, dried beans, navel oranges, apples etc. are really causing most Americans to worry though. Now, when the prices of 2-Liters of Coke, McDonald's cheeseburgers, TV dinners, and Frito-Lays start skyrocketing, then the masses will be outraged!

Bronco Bob
08-15-2007, 05:57 PM
Gouda

French Vanilla

Bronco_Beerslug
08-15-2007, 05:58 PM
I agree that high fuel prices are linked to rising prices elsewhere. I don't buy too much into the theory that higher prices of milk, eggs, fresh chicken, dried beans, navel oranges, apples etc. are really causing most Americans to worry though. Now, when the prices of 2-Liters of Coke, McDonald's cheeseburgers, TV dinners, and Frito-Lays start skyrocketing, then the masses will be outraged!LOL

Man, I'm glad I don't live like that!

Spider
08-15-2007, 09:38 PM
It's not just fuel...we can switch to whatever bio fuel we want, but the energy companies are still going to get theirs. All the bio fuel has done is make the cost of goods go up even more while being less efficent than regular gas.

LOL .. I like you Garcia , but man you are in a different world

Garcia Bronco
08-15-2007, 09:52 PM
LOL .. I like you Garcia , but man you are in a different world

33 percent of our corn production is going to e85 creation, which has in turn limited supply. So now anything that uses corn now costs more. Think of all the things that use corn. Coke, Beef, chicken, anything with corn syrup. E85 is also less efficent than gas in flexfeul vehicles

Spider
08-15-2007, 09:55 PM
33 percent of our corn production is going to e85 creation, which has in turn limited supply. So now anything that uses corn now costs more. Think of all the things that use corn. Coke, Beef, chicken, anything with corn syrup. E85 is also less efficent than gas in flexfeul vehicles

ok ........

Bronco Bob
08-15-2007, 10:15 PM
33 percent of our corn production is going to e85 creation, which has in turn limited supply. So now anything that uses corn now costs more. Think of all the things that use corn. Coke, Beef, chicken, anything with corn syrup. E85 is also less efficent than gas in flexfeul vehicles

It's stupid to use corn to make ethanol. It might make sense to
make ethanol in Brazil out of sugar cane, but it's stupid to make
ethanol in the United States. There just isn't enough land
suitable for growing corn.
The smart alternative is to make bio-diesel out of things like hemp
seed. Hemp will grow most near anywhere and doesn't need good
soil or lots of fertilizers and pesticides. But with the anti-drug lobby
and the DEA this isn't going to happen anytime soon, even though
hemp can be grown that contains no THC.
The only reason corn is being used to make ethanol is to boost
corn prices so huge agro-businesses can make a higher profit.
Probably another reason you won't be seeing bio-diesel made from
hemp any time soon.

broncos_mtnman
08-16-2007, 01:15 AM
33 percent of our corn production is going to e85 creation, which has in turn limited supply. So now anything that uses corn now costs more. Think of all the things that use corn. Coke, Beef, chicken, anything with corn syrup. E85 is also less efficent than gas in flexfeul vehicles

The Wall Street Journal wrote a story about this in Jan.
_____________________________


Very, Very Big Corn
Ethanol and its consequences.

Saturday, January 27, 2007 12:01 a.m. EST

President Bush made a big push for alternative fuels in his State of the Union speech Tuesday night, calling on Americans to reduce gasoline consumption by 20% over 10 years. And as soon as the sun rose on Wednesday, he set out to tour a DuPont facility in Delaware to tout the virtues of "cellulosic ethanol" and propose $2 billion in loans to promote the stuff. For a man who famously hasn't taken a drink for 20 years, that's a considerable intake of alcohol.

A bit of sobriety would go a long way in discussing this moonshine of the energy world, however. Cellulosic ethanol--which is derived from plants like switchgrass--will require a big technological breakthrough to have any impact on the fuel supply. That leaves corn- and sugar-based ethanol, which have been around long enough to understand their significant limitations. What we have here is a classic political stampede rooted more in hope and self-interest than science or logic.

Ostensibly, the great virtue of ethanol is that it represents a "sustainable," environmentally friendly source of energy--a source that is literally homegrown rather than imported from such unstable places as Nigeria or Iran.
That's one reason why, as Jerry Taylor and Peter Van Doren note in the Milken Institute Review, federal and state subsidies for ethanol ran to about $6 billion last year, equivalent to roughly half its wholesale market price. Ethanol gets a 51-cent a gallon domestic subsidy, and there's another 54-cent a gallon tariff applied at the border against imported ethanol. Without those subsidies, hardly anyone would make the stuff, much less buy it--despite recent high oil prices.

That's also why the percentage of the U.S. corn crop devoted to ethanol has risen to 20% from 3% in just five years, or about 8.6 million acres of farmland. Reaching the President's target of 35 billion gallons of renewable and alternative fuels by 2017 would, at present corn yields, require the entire U.S. corn harvest.

No wonder, then, that the price of corn rose nearly 80% in 2006 alone. (See the chart nearby.) Corn growers and their Congressmen love this, and naturally they are planting as much as they can. Look for a cornfield in your neighborhood soon. Yet for those of us who like our corn flakes in the morning, the higher price isn't such good news. It's even worse for cattle, poultry and hog farmers trying to adjust to suddenly exorbitant prices for feed corn--to pick just one industry example. The price of corn is making America's meat-packing industries, which are major exporters, less competitive.

In Mexico, the price of corn tortillas--the dietary staple of the country's poorest--has risen by about 30% in recent months, leading to widespread protests and price controls. In China, the government has put a halt to ethanol-plant construction for the threat it poses to the country's food security. Thus is a Beltway fad translated into Third World woes.

As for the environmental impact, well, where do we begin? As an oxygenate, ethanol increases the level of nitrous oxides in the atmosphere and thus causes smog. The scientific literature is also divided about whether the energy inputs required to produce ethanol actually exceed its energy output. It takes fertilizer to grow the corn, and fuel to ship and process it, and so forth. Even the most optimistic estimate says ethanol's net energy output is a marginal improvement of only 1.3 to one. For purposes of comparison, energy outputs from gasoline exceed inputs by an estimated 10 to one.

And because corn-based ethanol is less efficient than ordinary gasoline, using it to fuel cars means you need more gas to drive the same number of miles. This is not exactly a route to "independence" from Mideast, Venezuelan or any other tainted source of oil. Ethanol also cannot be shipped using existing pipelines (being alcohol, it eats the seals), so it must be trucked or sent by barge or train to its thousand-and-one destinations, at least until separate pipelines are built.

Even some environmentalists cry foul. Steve Sanderson, president of the Wildlife Conservation Society, tells us that intensive, subsidized sugar farming in Brazil--where the use of ethanol is most widespread--has displaced small tenant farmers, many of whom have taken to cutting down and farming land in the Amazon rain forest.

In the U.S., there is now talk of taking the roughly 40 million acres currently tied up in the Agriculture Department's conservation reserve and security programs and putting them into production for ethanol-related plants. "The land at risk under this ethanol program is land that's shown by the USDA to have had great results for the restoration of wildlife," Mr. Sanderson says, pointing especially to the grasslands of eastern Montana and the Dakotas. Hello ethanol, goodbye bison.

But what about global warming, where ethanol, as a non-fossil fuel, is supposed to make a positive contribution? Actually, it barely makes a dent. Australian researcher Robert Niven finds that the use of ethanol in gasoline--the standard way in which ethanol is currently used--reduces greenhouse gas emissions by no more than 5%. As Messrs. Taylor and Van Doren observe, "employing ethanol to reduce greenhouse gases is fantastically inefficient," costing as much as 16 times the optimal abatement cost for removing a ton of carbon from the atmosphere.

It's true that scientific advances will probably improve and perhaps even transform the utility of ethanol. Genetic modification will likely improve corn yields. And the President insists we are on the verge of breakthroughs in cellulosic technology, though experts tell us the technical hurdles are still huge. We'd be as happy as anyone if DuPont researchers finally discover the enzyme that can efficiently break down plants into starch, but betting billions of tax dollars and millions of acres of farmland on this hope strikes us as bad policy. If cellulose is going to be an energy miracle--an agricultural cold fusion--far better to let the market figure that out.

Not that any of these facts are likely to make much difference in the current Washington debate. The corn and sugar lobbies have their roots deep in both parties, and now they have the mantra of "energy independence" to invoke, however illusory it is. If anything, Congress may add to Mr. Bush's ethanol mandate requests.

So here comes Big Corn. Make that Very, Very Big Corn. Sooner or later, our experience with this huge public gamble may make us yearn for the efficiency, capacity, lower cost and--yes--superior environmental record of "Big Oil."