On the basis of this reasoning, it would then be best to eradicate
small farms and small farmers, for instance, and have it all replaced
by "more efficient" industrialized farming. Only it hasn't quite
worked out that way. What you tend to get instead is less efficiency,
or no efficiency, with large-scale externalizations, a poor product,
and unhappy (or dead) consumers.
Exaggeration?
>From the 1930's to the 1960's the free-range system was the popular
>way to raise poultry in the United states. It produced meaty, tender
>birds at a reasonable cost, using a reasonable amount of labor and
>providing valuable fertility to the land. Many farmers raised
>10,000-20,000 birds per year on short-grass pasture ("range"), both
>chickens and turkeys. With the rise of industrial agriculture and
>the development of the confinement broiler barn, this sustainable
>and profitable system was discontinued by means of withdrawing
>growers contracts. Left with no market or processing facilities the
>practice was abandoned within two or three years.
But the way it's been presented to the world is that the old ways
were less efficient. Actually they were more efficient, in more ways
than one, lacking, for instance, this current feature of the
"efficient" industrialized poultry production systems:
> >We don't need terrorists, we have industrial food suppliers. Or is it
> >possible that turkeys have become the weapon of choice for terrorists?
> >How can we call a food system sustainable that sickens an estimated 1.3
> >million Americans, hospitalizes 15,000, and kills 500 just from
>Salmonella every year?
> >Maybe it would be a good time to switch to something besides a commercial
> >turkey for Thanksgiving dinner. http://www.cspinet.org/new/200211211.html
Let alone the manure lakes, groundwater pollution, etc etc etc. In
France, for instance, in 2000, over 20% of all poultry (90 million
birds) was profitably, cleanly and safely raised using the old
free-range system.
Small-scale capitalism used to be the backbone of America. There's no
evidence that its replacement by large-scale, centralized
corporatization has brought any improvements, rather the contrary.
Big ain't beautiful.
If you're looking for particular examples of small being both
beautiful and profitable in the biodiesel field, you'd perhaps be
finding rather more of them had not small producers been threatened
with $25,000-per-day fines and told they had to pay $1 million-plus
testing costs or else. Now quite a number of people are planning
small-scale start-ups, seem to be happy with their business plans,
and should soon be testing the waters at the EPA since they changed
their tune.
It seems large producers, on the other hand, can't compete without
continued soy subsidies, at the taxpayer's expense, and the
continuance of a hopelessly uneconomic and unsustainable commodities
overproduction "system". The pricing structure of one such producer
(?), examined here recently, would not seem to leave any
justification for their support.
Of course public policy folks will not be rushing to support the
decentralization of energy supply that is the only path to a
sustainable energy future, regardless of the feedstock. That doesn't
mean *only* small and local and *no* big and central, but it does
mean an end to *only* big and central. There's room for both, and if
there isn't then room will have to be made.
Best
Keith
>Hello again. One charge that I have heard public policy folks levy at small
>producers is along the following lines: "Small producers can't make their
>production business really profitable, so they're not going to be able to
>contribute significantly to mass-market conversion from fossil fuels to
>biofuels... Therefore, since our policy goal is to maximize the use of
>cleaner domestically produced fuels, when considering policy and public
>support for BD, we'll seek to support large producers first and foremost."
>
>I have also spoken with small producers who themselves say that they're not
>sure how they'd make a profit...
>
>So, I'd like to know have your thoughts, whether in agreement or in
>rebuttal, regarding whether there is truth in this assertion, and also
>regarding what the public policy relevance should or should not be if it
>were true. And if it is not true, then what/who are the success stories in
>terms of profitable small-scale production and distribution?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Andrew Hoppin
>The Biofuel Business Development Project
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Biofuel-Business-Plan/
>Dedicated to Making An Immediate Impact
>On the Long-Range Future of Humanity
>------------------------------------
>N Space Labs, Inc.
>Vizualize Your Business
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>646.221.5602 (mobile)
>158 Lafayette St. 2nd Floor
>NY, NY 10013
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Andrew Hoppin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Monday, November 25, 2002 3:34 PM
> > To: biofuels-biz@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: big vs small: quality assurance
> >
> >
> > Hi folks. I'm learning a lot from the ongoing lively debate--
> > thank you.
> >
> > Regarding the issue that has been at hand-- whether big producers
> > deliver better quality and reliability than small producers or
> > not, and whether any quality differences are cause for concern
> > among potential consumers or not: it seems to me that one way to
> > nip this in the bud REGARDLESS of whether there are valid
> > concerns or not would be to have a credible BD fuel quality
> > testing service, perhaps with some public funding and perhaps
> > with modest fees paid by producers, perhaps on a sliding-scale
> > based on the size of their revenues. If a producer wished to be
> > "certified" that their fuel was top-notch, they could avail
> > themselves of this service by sending fuel samples (each month?)
> > and fleet managers, consumers, and anyone else who cares would
> > have an objective answer to their quality concerns, whether or
> > not those concerns are valid. Has this ever been undertaken?
> >
> > If not, would such a service effectively serve the purpose I've
> > outlined, and in what form (government, non-profit, or
> > for-profit) would such a service be most effectively delivered?
> >
> > Andrew Hoppin
> > The Biofuel Business Development Project
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Biofuel-Business-Plan/
> > Dedicated to Making An Immediate Impact
> > On the Long-Range Future of Humanity
> > ------------------------------------
> > N Space Labs, Inc.
> > Vizualize Your Business
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 646.221.5602 (mobile)
> > 158 Lafayette St. 2nd Floor
> > NY, NY 10013
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
ˇFREE Health Insurance Quotes-eHealthInsurance.com
http://us.click.yahoo.com/1.voSB/RnFFAA/46VHAA/FGYolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/
Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
