Author: GMO Pundit

The Market Value of GM Products
– Rob Carlson, Nature Biotechnology 27, 984 (2009) http://www.nature.com/nbt/

To the Editor: I am writing to point out that the Data Page published in the March issue 1 substantially underestimates the market value of transgenic crops. Using a more accurate estimate dramatically changes the fraction of US gross domestic product (GDP) that can be attributed to genetically modified (GM) systems….

…Taken together, the reports enable an estimation of the revenues from the major GM crops at about $65 billion in 2008. The data demonstrate substantial fluctuations in revenues due to changes in annual prices, even as the fraction of GM crops planted continues to increase. The ISAAA reports that about half of all transgenic seeds were planted in the United States 2, and if one assumes that prices paid for crops in the United States are representative of global averages, then global farm-scale revenues from GM corn, soy and cotton in 2008 were about $130 billion

Put Aside Prejudices
　
Paul Collier is a professor of economics at Oxford University and the director of the Center for the Study of African Economies. He is the author of “The Bottom Billion: Why the Poorest Countries Are Failing and What Can Be Done About It.”
　

Opponents talk darkly of risks but provide no scientific basis for their amorphous expressions of concern. Meanwhile the true risks are mounting. Over the past decade global food demand has risen more rapidly than expected. Supply may not keep pace with demand, inducing rising prices and periodic spikes. If this happens there is a risk that the children of the urban poor will suffer prolonged bouts of malnutrition.
African governments are now recognizing that by imitating the European ban on genetic modification they have not reduced the risks facing their societies but increased them. Thirteen years, during which there could have been research on African crops, have been wasted. Africa has been in thrall to Europe, and Europe has been in thrall to populism.
Genetic modification alone will not solve the food problem: like climate change, there is no single solution. But continuing refusal to use it is making a difficult problem yet more daunting.

Corn amylase improves efficiency and environmental footprint of corn to ethanol
25.oct.09
Crop Biotech Update

Corn Amylase (CA), an enzyme essential to convert available starch to fermentable sugars in the production of biofuels, can improve the efficiency, cost, and environmental footprint of biofuels. It will reduce the demand for natural resources, the consumption of fossil fuels, the emission of greenhouse gases, reduce utility costs at the plant and improve the energy balance (compared to ethanol produced from conventional corn). In Corn Amylase: Improving the Efficiency and Environmental Footprint of Corn to Ethanol through Plant Biotechnologypublished in the e-journal AgbioForum, John Urbanchuk and colleagues from LECG, LLC and Michigan State University review the potential economic and environmental benefits of CA on the production of ethanol from corn and sorghum.
Results were confirmed in a trial of a new variety of corn developed by Syngenta that expresses alpha-amylase directly in the seed endosperm. The authors noted that “This technology represents a novel approach to improving ethanol production in a way that can be integrated smoothly into the existing infrastructure.”

For the full article visit http://www.agbioforum.org/v12n2/v12n2a01-stone.htm

See earlier Pundit Post
New Breakthrough Biotechnology Adds Value to Corn Growers Output & Reduces Costs of Ethanol Biofuel.

 Reaping the benefits: Science and the sustainable intensification of global agriculture

Reaping the benefits: Science and the sustainable intensification of global agriculture

21 Oct 2009

The Royal Society has published the report of a landmark study examining the contribution of the biological sciences to food crop production.  The study was conducted by a working group chaired by Sir David Baulcombe FRS. The group included experts on agriculture, international development, conservation biology and plant science.

Food security is one of this century’s key global challenges. Producing enough food for the increasing global population must be done in the face of changing consumption patterns, the impacts of climate change and the growing scarcity of water and land. Crop production methods must also sustain the environment, preserve natural resources and support livelihoods of farmers and rural populations around the world. This report discusses the need for a sustainable intensification’ of global agriculture in which yields are increased without adverse environmental impact and without the cultivation of more land.

The report begins by setting out the challenges to food crop production. It then goes on to examine in detail the various technologies that might be used to enhance production, with the conclusion that a diversity of approaches are needed. Due to the scale of the challenge, no technology should be ruled out, and different strategies may need to be employed in different regions and circumstances. Finally, consideration is given to the consequences and complications of food crop innovation.

The recommendations of the report include the following:

• Research Councils UK (RCUK) should develop a cross-council grand challenge’ on global food crop security as a priority. This needs to secure at least £2 billion over 10 years to make a substantial difference.
• RCUK should increase support for ecosystem-based approaches, agronomy and the related sciences that underpin improved crop and soil management.
• Universities should work with funding bodies to reverse the decline in subjects relevant to a sustainable intensification of food crop production, such as agronomy, plant physiology, pathology and general botany, soil science, environmental microbiology, weed science and entomology