Tuesday October 22 Ag News

Rural Nebraska Communities have Access to $2.2 Million for Disaster Recovery Due to FEMA-Major Disaster Declarations

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Rural Development  Nebraska State Director Karl Elmshaeuser today announces that Nebraska has been allocated with nearly $2.2 million in grants available through the Community Facilities Program to help rural communities continue in their recovery from the devastating effects of FEMA declared disasters in Nebraska.

   “Nebraska has been hit hard by the devastating weather, with 83 of our counties receiving Major Disaster Declarations,” Elmshaeuser said. “USDA works hard to help communities thrive and this funding supports in their long-term recovery.”

   The $2.2 million is included in the Additional Supplemental Appropriations for Disaster Relief Act that President Trump signed into law on June 6, 2019.

   Nebraska declared counties are:  Adams, Antelope, Banner, Blaine, Boone, Box Butte, Boyd, Brown, Buffalo, Burt, Butler, Cass, Cedar, Cherry, Cheyenne, Clay, Colfax, Cuming, Custer, Dakota, Dawes, Dawson, Deuel, Dixon, Dodge, Douglas, Fillmore, Franklin, Frontier, Furnas, Gage, Garden, Garfield, Gosper, Greeley, Hall, Hamilton, Harlan, Holt, Howard, Jefferson, Johnson, Kearney, Keith, Keya Paha, Kimball, Knox, Lancaster, Lincoln, Logan, Loup, Madison, Merrick, Morrill, Nance, Nemaha, Nuckolls, Omaha Indian Reservation, Otoe, Pawnee, Phelps, Pierce, Platte, Polk, Ponca TDSA, Richardson, Rock, Sac and Fox Indian Reservation, Saline, Santee Indian Reservation, Sarpy, Saunders, Scotts Bluff, Seward, Sheridan, Sherman, Stanton, Thayer, Thomas, Thurston, Valley, Washington, Wayne, Webster, Wheeler, Winnebago Indian Reservation, and York.

      Grant applications will be accepted at USDA Rural Development Attn: Community Programs; 100 Centennial Mall North; Federal Building Room 308; Lincoln, Neb.  68508.  Applications will be accepted on a continual basis until funds are exhausted. Grant assistance will be provided on a graduated scale; smaller communities with the lowest median household income are eligible for a higher proportion of grant funds. For application details and additional information, see page 47477 of the Sept. 10 Federal Register.  In Nebraska, contact your local Rural Development Community Program Staff.

   More than 100 types of projects are eligible for Community Facilities funding. Eligible applicants include municipalities, public bodies, nonprofit organizations and federally recognized Native American tribes. Projects must be in eligible rural areas with a population of 20,000 or less.

   In April 2017, President Donald J. Trump established the Interagency Task Force on Agriculture and Rural Prosperity to identify legislative, regulatory and policy changes that could promote agriculture and prosperity in rural communities. In January 2018, Secretary Perdue presented the Task Force’s findings to President Trump. These findings included 31 recommendations to align the federal government with state, local and tribal governments to take advantage of opportunities that exist in rural America. Increasing investments in rural infrastructure is a cornerstone recommendation of the task force.

   To view the report in its entirety, please view the Report to the President of the United States from the Task Force on Agriculture and Rural Prosperity (PDF, 5.4 MB). In addition, to view the categories of the recommendations, please view the Rural Prosperity infographic (PDF, 190 KB).

   USDA Rural Development provides loans and grants to help expand economic opportunities and create jobs in rural areas. This assistance supports infrastructure improvements; business development; housing; community facilities such as schools, public safety and health care; and high-speed internet access in rural areas. For more information, visit www.rd.usda.gov.



Cuming County Board of Supervisors Seeking Extension Board Nominations

The Cuming County Board of Supervisors, are seeking nominations for individuals interested in serving a three-year term on the Cuming County Extension Board.  Due to changes in the laws, Extension Board Members are appointed by the Board of Supervisors rather than being elected.

Two positions on the Cuming County Extension Board are up for appointment.  The district lines are defined according to the Cuming County Board of Supervisors districts.  Nominees are needed for the districts served by Supervisors John Ross, District 2 and Clarence Tichota, District 4. Potential candidates are encouraged to contact the Extension Office, if you have questions on which supervisor district you reside in.

A nominating committee is seeking nominations or calls from interested individuals.  This nomination committee will be responsible for preparing a slate of potential candidates that will be submitted to the Board of Supervisors for their consideration. If you are interested in being a candidate, please feel free to contact the Cuming County Extension office at 402/372-6006.  You may also contact nominating committee members Kay Raabe, Terry Jahnke or Justin Sindelar.

According to Extension Educator Larry Howard, the operation of Nebraska Extension should be given serious consideration by all county residents.  It operates the tax funds under the guidance of the Cuming County Extension Board.  Extension programs focus on priority needs and issues facing people of the county.



Crop Residue Exchange Updated and Available for Listings
Mary Drewnoski - NE Extension Beef Systems Specialist

New updates make the Crop Residue Exchange http://cropresidueexchange.unl.edu/ even easier to use to link cattle producers and available grazing resources. Crop producers who have listed residue available for grazing in the past are encouraged to log in and update their listings on the Exchange for the fall and winter grazing season.

Recent updates to the Exchange have expanded its geographical reach to include large portions of the states that surround Nebraska. Crop producers in much of Iowa, Missouri, Kansas, Colorado, Wyoming, and South Dakota can now list fields they have available for grazing.

Another update allows livestock producers to save their searches and receive an email notification when a crop producer lists something matching their criteria. There is a lot more searching going on than we have listings. If a crop producr creates a new listing, odds are pretty good that in the near future several livestock producers will be receiving an email letting them know about it.

In addition to providing a winter feed resource, grazing corn residue can increase the amount and rate of corn residue breakdown. When grazed at proper stocking rates, small but positive impacts on subsequent crop production after grazing have been observed. University of Nebraska-Lincoln recommendations for establishing corn residue stocking rates are based on 50% utilization of leaves and husks (8 pounds per bushel or 20% of the total corn residue). Some additional corn residue disappears through trampling and wind loss, but there has been no increased erosion risks when only 40% to 50% of the corn residue was removed through grazing.

Getting Started with the Crop Residue Exchange
After establishing a log-in account on the Crop Residue Exchange, producers can draw out the plot of land available for grazing by using an interactive map and entering basic information about the type of residue, fencing situation, water availability, and dates available. They also need to provide their preferred contact information. The land available for grazing can be described as a “Residue Type” (corn, wheat, sorghum, other) or pasture. Pricing can be listed as a cost per acre or a cost per head per day. Livestock producers can search the Crop Residue Exchange database for grazing available within a radius for the location of interest. Livestock producers must be logged in to view the contact information attached to each listing.

The Crop Residue Exchange came online in August 2017. To date 281 registered users have posted 45 listings for grazing. Over 6,000 searches for grazing resources have been conducted on the Exchange and almost 600 views of contact information for available listings have occurred. The Exchange continues to expand in usage as well as features available to better connect livestock producers with forage resources.



Writing a Marketing Plan for Your Stored Grain
Jessica Groskopf - NE Extension Educator for Agricultural Economics

The goal for any farmer holding grain in storage should be to obtain a better price for that crop in the spring or summer than the price offered at harvest.

Some farmers put grain in the bin looking to sell it by hitting a grain marketing “home run,” i.e., selling all of their grain in storage at the highest price possible. This one-shot marketing approach is rarely a successful strategy because farmers either sell grain before the market high hits or wait too long and end up with a lower price than what was offered at harvest. Savvy grain marketers tend not to use this one-shot approach. The most successful marketers write a grain-marketing plan that guides them to sell smaller quantities of grain throughout the year. This approach allows the farmer to be more in control of the final farm average price. The following five steps describe how to write a grain-marketing plan.

1. Break the total amount of grain into smaller units.
Instead of thinking of your marketing plan as selling all of your grain at once, sell your grain in smaller quantities. Most farmers think in 1,000- or 5,000-bushel quantities. This allows multiple sales to occur and therefore the opportunity to take part in unforeseen rallies (and further price declines).

2. Set price targets.
When determining price targets after harvest, you will want to set targets above the price you could have obtained at harvest, plus any additional expenses accrued by storage. The longer the grain remains in storage, the higher the price target will need to be. Expenses to consider are bin rental/maintenance/repairs, insurance on grain in storage, potential quality deterioration, and additional interest expense on operating notes.

It is important that you set realistic price targets. Setting prices too high or too low may be detrimental to your plan. When your price targets aren’t realistic, you either sell too quickly at a low price or hold grain too long, waiting for a price the market never reaches. Price targets can always be adjusted if market fundamentals change.

3. Set sales deadlines.
If prices do not rise enough to meet your price target, you need to set sales deadlines to ensure you are proactive about selling. Sales deadlines ensure that you aren’t continuing to incur storage expenses while prices decline. Target prices and sales deadlines work together to help you achieve a farm price in a range that helps you survive.

Commodity prices typically have a defined seasonal price pattern. Setting sales deadlines that correspond to periods when prices are traditionally highest will help make marketing easier. Price patterns vary by commodity. Corn prices are typically highest in the spring (March – June,) and soybean prices are traditionally highest in summer (June – July). Don’t forget to calculate storage costs when taking this approach.

Another consideration when selecting sales deadlines is your cash flow needs. Are there certain times of the year when you need to make sales to make payments? Plan and have this cash ready by setting sales deadlines ahead of payment dates.

4. Know your contracts
There are several types of contracts you can use to sell grain. You should work with your local elevator or broker to determine what marketing contracts are available to you and what contracts you should be using to achieve your price targets and sales deadlines. Typical marketing contracts offered by most local elevators are
-    cash sales,
-    forward cash contracts,
-    basis contracts, and
-    hedge to arrive (HTA) contracts.

You can also work with a broker to establish hedges, and/or an options position.

5. Share your plan with someone else
Once you have written your plan, share it with someone else. Sharing your goals with your spouse, merchandiser, or banker will help keep you accountable to your marketing goals.

Marketing plans can become more complex. However, this basic outline will help you get started. Remember, the goal of the marketing plan is not to get distracted from your goals determined at the beginning of the crop cycle.



Iowa Corn and Peace Tree Brewing Co. Release Cornucopia Beer

Iowa Corn and Peace Tree Brewing Co. partnered to create a seasonal beer made from Iowa corn. The key ingredient to this Cornucopia beer is homegrown Iowa corn. The corn was grown by Iowa Corn Growers Association Director Steve Kuiper on his farm just five miles from Peace Tree’s Knoxville location. The limited-edition Cornucopia beer will be available through participating Hy-Vee, Fareway and other beer locations throughout Iowa. The draft will be available at participating craft beer bars and restaurants throughout Iowa.



ICA Scholarship Deadlines Approaching

The Iowa Cattlemen's Foundation offers a variety of scholarship opportunities throughout the year. Application deadlines are approaching for the:
1. Beef Scholarship Extravaganza
2. Maynard Jayne Scholars Program

Maynard Jayne Scholarship
The Iowa Cattlemen’s Foundation is currently accepting scholarship applications in honor of the late Maynard Jayne. The Jayne Family has graciously donated memorial monies as well as their own funds to develop the Maynard Jayne Scholars program.

Maynard Jayne was a long time Iowa Cattlemen’s Association employee. He began his career as a field representative and helped increase membership numbers across the state. His greatest contribution, though, was as a lobbyist for ICA at our State Capitol. Maynard’s industry knowledge and his ability to bring the right people together made him a highly respected key player at the state legislature.

Iowa Cattlemen’s Foundation will be awarding the Jayne Scholar at the Leadership Summit this coming December. The deadline for application submission is November 15th.

Beef Scholarship Extravaganza
The Iowa Cattlemen's Foundation is proud to host the Beef Scholarship Extravaganza. It is one of the most challenging and rewarding youth cattle competitions in the nation. Young people who participate in this event reap the benefits of their preparation long after the competition is over. Registration is due Nov. 5.

The contest is open to high school juniors and seniors who test their knowledge on beef industry and beef cattle management issues. Stations cover the following beef industry topics:
    Credit and Finance
    Seedstock Merchandising
    Nutrition 
    Reproduction  
    Industry Issues and Advocacy  
    Marketing
    Beef Management
    Health
    Job Interview   
    Keep-Cull Heifer Replacement Evaluation   

Applications can be found at www.iowacattlemensfoundation.org. For more information, please contact Mary Greiman at mary@iacattlemen.org or 641-425-1533.



FFAR and National Pork Board Develop Tools to Detect and Understand Spread of African Swine Fever Virus

The African Swine Fever virus (ASFV) is a highly contagious disease that spreads rapidly in pig populations. It has no impact on people, so pork remains safe to consume. To help keep the U.S. ASFV-free and protect the country’s pigs, the Foundation for Food and Agriculture Research (FFAR) and the National Pork Board (NPB) awarded $535,780 to research teams at Kansas State University and Iowa State University to study how ASFV survives and how to test pigs for the virus.

ASFV has existed in Africa for decades. However, the virus is spreading due to changing production practices and increasing globalization. ASFV entered China in August 2018 and is now quickly infecting swine herds across the globe. The virus has also been reported in Europe. The current state of ASFV spread and concerns that it could enter North America increases risk for pig farming. The U.S., specifically, produces 125 million pigs annually.

To date, a vaccine or treatment for the virus has yet to be developed although research is underway. Farmers are focused on ways to prevent the virus from entering the U.S. as losses would be staggering not only for the pork industry, but for other agriculture commodities as well. 

“We remain committed to investing Pork Checkoff funds in strategic ways, such as this collaboration to find new ways to protect our domestic swine herd from foreign animal disease threats,” said David Newman, president of the National Pork Board and a producer representing Arkansas. “Understanding how African swine fever survives can help us create better techniques for controlling the spread of this costly virus and reduce the odds of a domestic outbreak.”

Even though ASFV does not affect human health, it threatens the $20 billion-dollar U.S. swine industry and the 550,000 American jobs created by the industry. To date, only limited research funding is available, which is why FFAR and the National Pork Board are collaborating on funding research projects to diagnose and manage an ASFV outbreak in the U.S.

The main focus for producers is preventing the virus from entering the U.S. and preparing the industry by understanding the survivability mechanisms of the virus. This knowledge will help to identify strategies to keep it out of the country and assist in creating rapid and accurate virus identification techniques in case the virus does reach the U.S.

Research funded in this collaboration includes studies by Kansas State University and Iowa State University. Kansas State University researchers seek to understand how ASFV survives and continues to infect other animals in various environments. If scientists understand how the disease spreads, they will be better able to control, or even stop, the spread of this virus. Additional work at Kansas State University is developing tests to detect ASFV. A third project is creating diagnostic test to quickly test entire herds for ASF.

Iowa State University researchers are focusing on how best to identify foreign animal diseases at low prevalence in large commercial pens using oral fluid samples. This test allows farmers to string a rope in the pen, the pigs will naturally chew on the rope and then the rope can be tested to detect for traces of targeted viruses.

“There is no time to waste. We must work quickly, and through partnership with the National Pork Board, to drive solutions pork producers can use to detect and manage infected animals if the virus reaches the U.S. This research may be the key to dramatically reducing any potential spread of African Swine Fever,” said Sally Rockey, Ph.D., FFAR executive director. “U.S. Pork producers are already coping with uncertainty across the entire sector and an outbreak of African Swine Fever would devastate American farmers, who are already struggling.”

FFAR’s grant is being matched by funding from the National Pork Board, Cargill, Kemin, Purina Animal Nutrition and Kansas State University for a total investment of $535,780.



USDA Cold Storage September 2019 Highlights

Total red meat supplies in freezers on September 30, 2019 were down 2 percent from the previous month and down 4 percent from last year. Total pounds of beef in freezers were down 1 percent from the previous month and down 8 percent from last year. Frozen pork supplies were down 1 percent from the previous month but up 2 percent from last year. Stocks of pork bellies were down 11 percent from last month but up 34 percent from last year.

Total frozen poultry supplies on September 30, 2019 were down 1 percent from the previous month and down 5 percent from a year ago. Total stocks of chicken were up 2 percent from the previous month but down 4 percent from last year. Total pounds of turkey in freezers were down 6 percent from last month and down 6 percent from September 30, 2018.

Total natural cheese stocks in refrigerated warehouses on September 30, 2019 were up slightly from the previous month but down 1 percent from September 30, 2018.  Butter stocks were down 1 percent from last month but up 7 percent from a year ago.

Total frozen fruit stocks on September 30, 2019 were up slightly from last month but down 11 percent from a year ago. Total frozen vegetable stocks were up 15 percent from last month but down 1 percent from a year ago.



NEBRASKA CHICKEN AND EGGS

All layers in Nebraska during September 2019 totaled 9.26 million, up from 7.97 million the previous year, according to the USDA's National Agricultural Statistics Service. Nebraska egg production during September totaled 226 million eggs, up from 199 million in 2018. September egg production per 100 layers was 2,446 eggs, compared to 2,499 eggs in 2018.

Iowa egg production during September 2019 was 1.40 billion eggs, down 2 percent from last month but up 3 percent from last year, according to the latest Chickens and Eggs report from the USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service. The average number of all layers on hand during September 2019 was 57.7 million, up 1 percent from last month but down 1 percent from last year. Eggs per 100 layers for September were 2,433, down 3 percent from last month but up 4 percent from last year.

September Egg Production Up 2 Percent
United States egg production totaled 9.19 billion during September 2019, up 2 percent from last year. Production included 8.04 billion table eggs, and 1.15 billion hatching eggs, of which 1.07 billion were broiler-type and 81.7 million were egg-type. The average number of layers during September 2019 totaled 394 million, up 1 percent from last year. September egg production per 100 layers was 2,332 eggs, up 1 percent from September 2018.
                                   
Total layers in the United States on October 1, 2019 totaled 395 million, up 1 percent from last year. The 395 million layers consisted of 333 million layers producing table or market type eggs, 58.2 million layers producing broiler-type hatching eggs, and 3.46 million layers producing egg-type hatching eggs. Rate of lay per day on October 1, 2019, averaged 77.6 eggs per 100 layers, up 1 percent from October 1, 2018.



NCBA Applauds Introduction of Livestock Risk Management and Education Act

Todd Wilkinson, South Dakota cattle producer and NCBA Policy Division Vice Chair, today released the following statement in response to the introduction of the Livestock Risk Management and Education Act by U.S. Rep. Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.):

“NCBA applauds Representative Dusty Johnson's introduction of the Livestock Risk Management and Education Act yesterday on the House floor. This legislation will provide boots-on-the-ground cattle producers with critical resources and opportunities to increase their understanding and engagement with risk management tools. This bill speaks directly to our core values as an industry - arming producers with the latest farm management resources and tools in order to help them navigate ever-changing and dynamic market conditions.

"In a market environment that continues to challenge even the most experienced multi-generational operations, NCBA believes that it is critical for producers to understand their options for managing risk. The Livestock Risk Management and Education Act policy will provide the U.S. Secretary of Agriculture the authority and flexibility to collaborate with industry to ensure that cattle farmers and ranchers have access to those options and the knowledge base to determine which ones are right for their operations. As the oldest and largest national trade association representing the U.S. cattle industry, securing these kinds of educational resources for our members is critical to our vitality into the future.

"NCBA members passed policy that directs us to engage in developing comprehensive programs for NCBA members regarding the mechanics of the commodity futures and options markets and the application of risk management tools. The Livestock Risk Management and Education Act does just that, and NCBA is proud to support this legislation and we look forward to engaging with Congress to advance this bill.”



Exports and the Impact of the U.S. Dollar Value on Beef Trade
Josh Maples, Extension Economist, Dept of Ag Econ, Mississippi State University

The latest Livestock and Meat Monthly Trade data from the Economic Research Service (ERS) was released on October 7th and included the month of August 2019 as the most recent data available. The purpose of this article is not just to discuss the export data from this report, but also to discuss an important but complex factor that impacts trade: the value of the U.S. dollar.

To the ERS report first, beef exports were lower in August 2019 as compared to July 2019 and also to August 2018. For January-August, beef exports were 3.8 percent lower than in the same period of 2018. Exports to Japan, the top U.S. beef export destination, were down 8.6 percent during this time period. Exports to South Korea were up 8 percent. Together, these two countries accounted for 50.5 percent of U.S. beef exports during data available for 2019. The October USDA World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates (WASDE) report lowered the 2019 projection for beef exports to 3.126 billion pounds which would be about a 1 percent decline compared to 2018.

Now let's shift focus to the value of the U.S. dollar. For many of us, we might first think about inflation or the thought that "a dollar isn't worth what it used to be." This is, of course, true but is not exactly the type of value to consider when viewing things in the context of trade with other countries. More specifically, we are considering exchange rates or the value of the U.S. dollar in another country. When customers in other countries want to purchase U.S. beef, an exchange of their currency with U.S. dollars must occur at some point. The value of the U.S. dollar vs. the foreign currency is the exchange rate and fluctuations in this rate can make beef more (or less) expensive to the importer. Exchange rates fluctuate frequently between foreign currencies and are actively traded in foreign exchange (or Forex) markets.

Let's consider a simplified U.S. beef exported to Japan example for illustration. Let's assume the exchange rate for one U.S. dollar is 100 Japanese yen. Also, assume that a customer in Japan wants to import 1,000 pounds of U.S. beef and the price of that beef is 5 U.S. dollars (USD) per pound. At the current exchange rate, the customer in Japan would pay 500,000 yen for this transaction (1,000 lbs. x 5 USD x 100 yen). Now assume that a month later, the exchange rate for one U.S. dollar is 102 Japanese yen. This would be considered a stronger U.S. dollar relative to the yen because it costs more yen to buy the same dollar. Even if the price of beef in U.S. dollars is still 5 USD per pound, the customer in Japan would now pay 510,000 yen for this transaction (1,000 lbs. x 5 USD x 102 yen).

Thus, the example of a 2 percent increase in the exchange rate (from 100 to 102) led to a 2 percent increase in the cost to the customer in Japan. This is why a strong U.S. dollar can sometimes be described as a headwind to U.S. beef exports. The flip side is that a stronger dollar makes goods imported into the U.S. relatively cheaper.

Foreign exchange markets and their impact on trade are very complex, to say the least. The above example does not consider that the exchange rates between other beef exporting countries (e.g. Australia) and key beef importers (e.g. Japan) are also constantly changing. Fluctuating exchange rates could make it cheaper for the customer in Japan to import U.S. beef one month and Australian beef the next month even if the price of beef in those countries doesn't change. We know that prices change frequently within countries, countries face different tariff structures, and exchange rates are constantly changing - and this doesn't even consider the cost of transporting the beef. Put simply, there are a lot of moving parts.

The U.S. dollar is relatively strong right now and this is likely one of the contributing factors to the slightly lower exports shown in the ERS report. Compared to the Australian dollar, the U.S. dollar averaged about 8% stronger during January-September 2019 than during the same period of 2018. It was also stronger than 2018 levels for comparisons against the Canadian dollar, the Euro, and the Mexican peso. Contrary to the example used above, the U.S. dollar has been about the same or slightly weaker relative to the Japanese yen compared to a year ago which would imply that U.S. beef is slightly cheaper to customers in Japan if everything else remained constant. But everything has not remained constant and the exchange rates between Japan and other beef exporting countries have also changed. While exchange rates are just one factor in the beef trade complex, they can have important implications on the flow of beef around the world.



New Court Documents Detail Rampant EPA Abuse of Small Refinery Exemption Program

Newly available court documents assert that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency inappropriately granted Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) compliance exemptions to certain small refineries that did not even qualify for the waivers, and that there was division within the Trump administration about its new approach to small refinery hardship exemption requests.

Specifically, the briefs and supporting documents show EPA granted disproportionate economic hardship exemptions to small refineries whose previous exemptions had fully lapsed, meaning the Agency disregarded the requirement that refiners may only obtain an “extension” of an existing exemption.

The redacted briefs and other documents filed in the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals pertain to Renewable Fuels Association et al. v. EPA, which addresses EPA’s decisions to retroactively grant hardship exemptions to two refineries owned by HollyFrontier and one refinery owned by CVR’s Wynnewood subsidiary. An audio file of the oral argument was also recently made available by the Court.

The exemptions, which include two granted for RFS compliance year 2016 and one for compliance year 2017, were impermissible under the statute and based on analysis that rendered EPA’s actions arbitrary and capricious, according to the opening and reply briefs filed by RFA, along with the American Coalition for Ethanol, the National Corn Growers association, and National Farmers Union.

The petitioners’ briefs argue that EPA, in addition to ignoring the commonsense meaning of “extension,” also misinterpreted the phrase “disproportionate economic hardship”—the statutory criteria required to extend an exemption. EPA’s interpretation is also undermined by the agency’s own published conclusions that RFS compliance costs are generally passed through to purchasers of fuel and are borne proportionately for small and large refineries alike.

The parties’ filings also revealed what ethanol interests had suspected for quite some time – that EPA was granting full exemptions not only where the Department of Energy had recommended only a partial exemption, but even where DOE had recommended a denial of the small refinery exemption extension in its entirety. EPA’s supplemental proposed rulemaking for the 2020 RVO, while proposing an inadequate solution to the small refiner exemption problem, reveals the extent to which EPA departed from DOE’s recommendations. For the 2016-2018 compliance years, DOE on average recommended that 7.6 billion gallons of gasoline and diesel from small refineries be exempted from RFS obligations; however, EPA disregarded those recommendation and actually exempted an average of 12.8 billion gallons.

Although EPA maintained that the statute gives it final say on whether to extend the exemptions, EPA’s decision to grant a full exemption where DOE recommended full denial is at odds with the recently released EPA decision document for 2018 small refinery exemptions, where EPA indicated that it denied all exemption requests where DOE had recommended denials.

Although the issues have been fully briefed by the parties, on October 15, RFA and the other petitioners filed a request for the Court to consider three new documents that reveal disagreement within the administration regarding its approach to small refinery exemptions.

The first document, a memo authored by Francis Brooke, Special Assistant on the President’s National Economic Council, describes a 2018 proposal to resolve the differences between ethanol and oil interests in part by a “restructuring” whereby “EPA will grant future small refinery exemptions based on only true disproportionate economic hardship,” implying the administration was knowingly issuing waivers to small refineries who were not truly experiencing disproportionate economic hardship. The second document details the reservations of David Schnare, one of the senior aides to Former EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, regarding the Agency’s granting of small refinery exemptions that Schnare maintained were unlawful. The third document is the EPA decision document for 2018 exemption extensions, showing inconsistencies in EPA’s adherence to DOE recommendations.

A decision by the court, which could impact how EPA grants other retroactive small refinery exemptions in the future, may come by early 2020. 



National Sorghum Producers Partners with USDA to Quantify Sorghum Sustainability in Key Ethanol Production Region

National Sorghum Producers today announced a partnership with the U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service in Kansas. The partnership will be executed through a conservation collaboration grant that will document sorghum farmer practices to promote positive conservation outcomes and quantify the environmental footprint of the crop.

"Sorghum farmers in Kansas and across the nation have long been good stewards of the environment around them," said NSP CEO Tim Lust. "Today, we will continue documenting this fact and work to understand how we can improve even more. With 74 percent of sorghum grown using conservation tillage and 91 percent receiving no supplemental irrigation water, improvement is a tall order, but we believe our farmers are up to the challenge."

"One-third of the U.S. sorghum crop is used to produce fuel ethanol, which receives a premium for lower carbon intensity scores in certain markets," he said. "This makes demonstrating sustainability and continuous improvement at the farm level extremely important. Fortunately, sustainability goals in fuel markets and conservation goals here at home go hand-in-hand, and we look forward to working with NRCS to further these goals and create additional opportunities for sorghum farmers."



Syngenta Commits $2 Billion and Sets New Targets for Innovation to Tackle Climate Change

Syngenta today announced $2 billion will be spent over the next five years to help farmers prepare for and tackle the increasing threats posed by climate change.

The investment supports a new Syngenta sustainability goal of delivering at least two technological breakthroughs to market each year, to reduce agriculture’s contribution to climate change, harness its mitigation capacity, and help the food system stay within planetary boundaries.

Erik Fyrwald, Chief Executive Officer at Syngenta also announced that the investment in research and development for sustainable agriculture will be matched by a drive to reduce the carbon intensity of the company’s operations by at least 50% by 2030 to support the ambitious goals of the Paris Agreement on climate change. Syngenta’s commitment has been validated and endorsed by the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi).

“Agriculture is now at the front line of global efforts to tackle climate change,” said Mr Fyrwald. “Syngenta is committed to accelerating our innovation to find better and ever safer solutions to address the shared challenge of climate change and biodiversity loss.”

“These aren’t just words, this is real action that will drive focus in Syngenta to help farmers tackle climate change and reduce the sector’s contribution to the world’s greenhouse gas emissions.”

The $2 billion will be directed towards programs with clearly differentiated benefits or breakthrough technologies that will enable a step change in agricultural sustainability, such as land use, soil health and integrated pest management.

Through a multi-year collaboration with The Nature Conservancy, Syngenta is developing strategies to identify and test new innovations and technology that can benefit farmers and contribute to positive environmental outcomes. The collaboration is grounded in efforts to promote soil health, resource efficiency and habitat protection in major agricultural regions worldwide.

Sally Jewell, CEO at The Nature Conservancy said: “Achieving conservation at scale will require bold action from the private sector. As businesses increasingly recognize the risks of climate change and the benefits of sustainability, we welcome the opportunity to contribute our science and expertise to help transform business practices. Syngenta’s investment in innovation is an important step toward a future where people and nature thrive.”

Cynthia Cummis, Director of Private Sector Climate Mitigation at World Resources Institute, one of the Science Based Targets initiative partners said: "We congratulate Syngenta for having their emissions reduction targets validated by the Science Based Targets initiative. Leadership from the agribusiness sector is vital in the fight against climate change, and by setting these targets, Syngenta is putting themselves on a pathway to future-proof growth.”

The targets form part of Syngenta’s Accelerating Innovation commitment launched earlier this year to address the increased challenges faced by farmers because of climate change, soil erosion and biodiversity loss. Progress against these targets will be reported annually and independently audited. The announcement was in large part informed by the completion of 150 listening sessions around the globe to help the company’s leaders identify priority areas for investment.