Guest essay by David Archibald
A correspondent in the Corn Belt emailed on 10th August:
“Here in north central Illinois at exit 56 on I-80, most of the corn was planted by May 15.
The GDD totals since May 15 at Moline, Illinois.
- May 15-31 + 1.7 GDD >normal.
- June 1-30 – 32.7 GDD < normal.
- July 1-31 – 94.5 GDD < normal.
- August 1-9 – 33.9 GDD < normal.
Total since May 15 = 1695.0 GDD = -159.4 < normal, or about 8 normal days in early September. Corn that has a 2,500 GDD rating needs about 40 days yet. Most of the corn planted in NC Illinois is in the 2,450 GDD to 2,700 GDD maturity area.
The area of greatest risk is in IA north of Route 30, MN, WI and the Dakotas.”
The corn market doesn’t see a problem with corn prices off 30%-odd from where they started the year, as shown in Figure 1 at right.
To illustrate the problem in parts of the Corn Belt, Figure 2 shows the average Growing Degree Days (GDD) experienced in Northwest Indiana, fairly close to the center of the Corn Belt:
From where we are at the time of the incoming correspondence, marked on the graph at 10th August, the heat received by the corn crop starts falling away.
Staying in Northwest Indiana, if we assume that the crop there was also 159 GDD below a normal season, Figure 3 illustrates the effect of on achieving the necessary 2500 GDD for crop maturity:
The upper red line shows the cumulative GDD for a crop planted on 15th May if the season had been normal from that date. Under that case, 2,500 GDD would be achieved by 26th September well before the first frost date for the area. The season has been colder than average with GDD for July 15 per cent below normal. The green line shows the fate of the crop if the season reverts to normality from 10th August. Under that case, 2,500 GDD is reached by 17th October, very close to the first Fall frost date. The lower dark blue line shows the effect of the season being 10% cooler from here.
While we cheer on the Arctic sea ice extent, there are farmers in the northern half of the Corn Belt who are now concerned about how their crop will finish.
Related articles
- Corn in U.S. Seen by Cordonnier at Risk of Damage From Frost (bloomberg.com)
- Indiana Farmers Look for the Heat to Return (hoosieragtoday.com)
UPDATE: Lows this morning from Dr. Ryan Maue – Anthony
GDD buries two factors for Corn growth – the first is the temp at which corn grows best and the second is the flux of solar energy coupled with the length of the day. The latter falls off precipitously in late August and as such a GDD on August 1 is VERY different from the same one on Sept 1. Plant growth will essentially stop when the latter reaches a critical point.
The graphs on this post are fine, but…lets actually get some data. The easiest way to know how the crop is doing is to walk into a field and pull an ear and look at the kernels. I would challenge a WT reader or two in MN, Iowa, NE to go do this and post the pics of a slice through the ear.
James B says:
August 14, 2013 at 11:34 am
> @ur momisugly richard –
> Charming as always. It’s clear I’m getting under your skin. I’m having fun.
I would have read more if you were being informative.
46F (6.5C) this morning in the mid-Appalachians. Jeesh — it’s Aug 15th!
eng says:
August 15, 2013 at 5:57 am
46F (6.5C) this morning in the mid-Appalachians. Jeesh — it’s Aug 15th!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
Tell me about it. 11:00 am in mid North Carolina, sunny and it was 64F and it is FINALLY starting to warm. Feels like mid-September
@ur momisuglyMike Maguire –
Re: Corn-based ethanol biofuels
Thanks for your citation.
I agree with you, and so do many environmentalists. Corn – the largest source of ethanol produced in the U.S.- is bad agribusiness with high production costs and significant environmental impacts from cultivation, fuel production, and use. See citations at the end of this post for details.
There are sources for ethanol (methyl alcohol) with lower environmental impact than corn. Ethanol from cellulose sources – corncobs, straw, sawdust, and crops such as switchgrass – are being developed and have lower impact than corn production. The PNAS/National Academy of Sciences study “Climate change and health costs of air emissions from biofuels and gasoline” quantifies, determines costs and, “compares the life-cycle climate-change and health effects of … emissions gasoline, corn ethanol, and cellulosic ethanol.” It shows impact costs for celluosic ethanol was significantly lower, averaging 35% of the cost of gasoline fuel. The lowest corn ethanol fuel costs were the same as to gasoline, highest were 200% of gasoline cost.
Argonne National Laboratory analyzed the greenhouse gas emissions of many different engine and fuel combinations. Comparing ethanol blends with gasoline alone, they showed reductions of 8% with the biodiesel/petrodiesel blend known as B20, 17% with the conventional E85 ethanol blend, and that using cellulosic ethanol lowers emissions 64%.
Best –
James B
Chicago
1.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corn_ethanol
2.) PNAS/National Academy of Sciences study: “Climate change and health costs of air emissions from biofuels and gasoline”: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2009/02/02/0812835106.full.pdf
3.) PNAS/National Academy of Sciences study: “Corn-based ethanol production compromises goal of reducing nitrogen export by the Mississippi River”: http://www.pnas.org/content/105/11/4513.full.pdf
4.) @ur momisugly Treehugger.com – Author Eric Leech, “New Study Finds Corn-based Ethanol More Harmful Than Oil-based Gasoline” by Eric Leech, February 7, 2009: http://www.treehugger.com/corporate-responsibility/new-study-finds-corn-based-ethanol-more-harmful-than-oil-based-gasoline.html
5.) Argonne Labratories Fuel Comparison Study, cited online at: The Biofuels FAQs, The Biofuels Source Book, Energy Future Coalition, United Nations Foundation: http://www.energyfuturecoalition.org/biofuels/benefits_env_public_health.
James B says August 15, 2013 at 9:00 am
Resistant to reason and impervious to logic; on the other hand it has been said that its difficult for a man to understand something completely contrary when his very paycheck relies on the nonsense he ‘peddles’ (or is paid to peddle?) …
.
JAMESB SAYS
First, the global warming contribution from the emissions from the process of converting coal or other materials to fuels, followed by the emissions from fuel combustion itself. In the US for example, transportation generates more than one-third of all U.S. carbon dioxide emissions and 30 percent of America’s total global warming emissions, per the US-EPA.
HENRY SAYS
since we do not know what the problem is – if it is bad
it is better to go back to the real science
and try to understand
http://blogs.24.com/henryp/2013/04/29/the-climate-is-changing/
For those interested
Corn Growth Stage Development: http://weedsoft.unl.edu/documents/growthstagesmodule/corn/corn.htm#
Corn typically takes 125 days after emergence to mature. You need ground temps over ~ 55F for the seed to break dormancy.
The Agronomy Dept.at Purdue Univ. says, When soils warm to the mid-50′s or warmer, emergence will occur in seven days or less if soil moisture is adequate. Thermal time from planting to emergence is approximately 115 growing degree days (GDDs) using the modified growing degree formula (Nielsen, 2008) with air temperatures or about 119 GDDs based on soil temperatures. A graph of mean temperature vs emergence link shows you really want the temperature above 56°F where the inflection point of the curve is. Otherwise the seed is just sitting in the ground waiting for the correct temperature to be reached and therefore at risk.
Comment from this spring on a The Farm Journal article from a cynical farmer…
Tasseling or polination
So figure the corn emerged June 1, and it takes 125 days on average to mature. You are pushing October first or later for full maturity. So what happens if you get a frost?
The chart included is for the number of days from tasseling.
So figuring tasseling the second week of July you need no frost before mid September or you get crop reduction.
The contribution of the corn crop here in Central MN to the US total is minor, however, famers have all ready begun stripping their fields for feed silage sold at a fraction of recent year’s prices.
The fields are mathematically eliminated from reaching maturity. Highs will climb back into the 80s next week but lows will continue in the 50s leaving the ground cool to mid-day.
gary gulrud says: @ur momisugly August 15, 2013 at 3:51 pm
The fields are mathematically eliminated from reaching maturity. Highs will climb back into the 80s next week but lows will continue in the 50s leaving the ground cool to mid-day.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I am in mid North Carolina and we were 63F til midday today. Usually we are in the high eighties or nineties…. Weird. I did not see the corn go in on my street until close to the first of June. Too wet and cold.
***
James B says:
August 14, 2013 at 11:34 am
Second are the public health costs and deaths from pollution created burning coal and other hydrocarbon fuels. I refer you to the 12 June 2013 Guardian article:online – Excerpt: “Air pollution from Europe’s 300 largest coal power stations causes 22,300 premature deaths a year and costs companies and governments billions of pounds in disease treatment and lost working days, says a major study of the health impacts of burning coal to generate electricity.”
***
I feel sorry for you if you actually believe that. A mind is a terrible thing to lose…
@James Baldwin B
“Argonne National Laboratory analyzed the greenhouse gas emissions of many different engine and fuel combinations. Comparing ethanol blends with gasoline alone, they showed reductions of 8% with the biodiesel/petrodiesel blend known as B20, 17% with the conventional E85 ethanol blend, and that using cellulosic ethanol lowers emissions 64%.”
Those that advertise corn ethanol as contributing less greenhouse gas emissions, have always(in my book) been telling a lie about the lie.
1. If analyzing all the many factors that go into producing the corn(easily the highest polluting crop) ethanol causes MORE not less pollution.
2. CO2 isn’t pollution. This should get 0(zero) weighting regarding corn ethanol
When a battle over ethanol takes place between the 2 opposing sides and greenhouse gas emission become the focus of the debate, it’s like a discussion over whether exercise is good or bad for your health and the focus becomes television viewing habits.
Some people might watch tv on their exercise bike/treadmill and people that watch tv all day probably dont exercise much but that has nothing to do with whether exercise is good or bad for health.
Growing corn causes more pollution than any other crop. It also uses alot of natural resources. Irrigated corn and ethanol plants use tremendous amounts of water.
Doing this for food is not only justifiable, it’s necessarily and worth the negative consequences.
Doing this for an inefficient fuel to substitute for another fuel that we already have in abundance that beats out ethanol in almost every measuring category is the 2nd dumbest scientifically based scam perpetrated on the human race.
CO2 as pollution is number 1.
Mike Maguire says: @ur momisugly August 16, 2013 at 12:13 pm
….Growing corn causes more pollution than any other crop. It also uses alot of natural resources. Irrigated corn and ethanol plants use tremendous amounts of water.
Doing this for food is not only justifiable, it’s necessarily and worth the negative consequences….
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I will agree with you there. Corn is very hard on the land.
The only reason we have Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations is because the US government uses taxpayer money to pay for the corn. Otherwise grass-fed beef/hogs would be more economically viable. Poultry has to be housed or you lose too many to predators.