Tag: crops

“Biosafety Engineers” for Gmo Industry?

  • According to the USDA, 40% of the corn grown this year in the U.S. has been genetically modified. Some researchers fear there's not enough oversight on the rapidly growing biotech industry. A program at the University of Minnesota wants to create a new profession - the 'Biosafety Engineer.' (photo courtesy of the USDA)

Genetic engineering – especially when it comes to food – is a battleground. On one side: people who fear a world of contaminated food, harming humans and the environment. The other side fears we’ll miss an opportunity to prevent hunger and disease. Now there’s a ground breaking initiative that might produce compromise. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mary Stucky reports that some researchers think safety can be built into the bio tech industry:

Transcript

Genetic engineering – especially when it comes to food – is a
battleground. On one side: people who fear a world of contaminated
food, harming humans and the environment. The other side fears
we’ll miss an opportunity to prevent hunger and disease. Now, there’s
a ground breaking initiative that might produce compromise. The Great
Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mary Stucky reports that some researchers
think safety can be built into the bio tech industry:


To remove a gene from one organism and transfer it to another…
that’s genetic engineering. Genetically modified or GM crops are
easier to grow, according to bio tech supporters and in the future
might be more nutritious. But they also might contain hidden
allergens, because they use genes from a plant or animal that
people might be allergic to. And there are concerns that GM crops
might harm the environment by crossbreeding with natural plants in
the wild. And so the University of Minnesota is proposing a
solution – an entirely new profession – call them biotech safety
engineers – along with a new science of bio safety. Anne
Kapuscinski is a researcher at the University of Minnesota and a
force behind the initiative called Safety First. Kapuscinski says
rather than regulating the industry after a new product is developed,
companies should prove safety first.


“It will mean that some ideas that will be on the lab bench won’t go
any further in development because the developers
will realize there are safety concerns that we don’t know how to
mitigate, or how to prevent from happening or how to address.”


And that could save companies money… by avoiding costly mistakes
such as the Starlink corn debacle. That’s when genetically modified
corn accidentally mixed with conventional corn and got into dozens of
foods. Kapuscinski says it was common knowledge in the industry that
the corn could get mixed up because of the way it’s transported and
stored… which might have been avoided with uniform safety standards
and government oversight. But until now, industry has resisted that.
They’ve been touting the benefits rather than the risks such as this
ad campaign put out by a group called the Biotechnology Industry
Organization.


(music under)


“Biotechnology, a big word that means hope.”


But one expert says if the industry wants to inspire public
confidence, it should support the Safety First initiative. John
Howard is the founder of a Texas based biotech firm called
ProdiGene. Not all biotech companies support the University of
Minnesota effort, but Howard thinks it has a good chance of
alleviating public concerns.


“The problem is, however, if you do it yourselves, what
credibility do you have as a company promoting your own safety
assessment? So an independent agency or source that comes out
and says, ‘Look, this is now credible, we’ve looked at all the safety
issues,’ that’s great, and if they find something that we’ve missed
then fine, we want to do it that way.”


John Howard says his company is working to bio-engineer corn to
deliver drugs. For instance, if you need insulin you could have it
in your breakfast cereal.


Opponents of bio tech say we don’t know all of the ramifications of
engineering drugs into food or altering the genetics of any organism,
but John Howard thinks we know enough to be safe.


“You can always argue that we just don’t know
enough yet and that’s an argument that can go on and on. And this
applies to everything that we think about in terms of risk. But
what you can do is look at a risk benefit equation. There’s
no question this is a for-profit company, let’s not make any mistake,
but not at the expense of harming people.”


And supporters say the Safety First initiative will see to that.
Lawrence Jacobs is a political scientist at the University of
Minnesota and a leader in Safety First. Jacobs says, like it or not,
GM food is here to stay.


“If we do not find some credible way to address the biosafety issues in
biotechnology, we are heading for a major maelstrom. The challenge
that’s out there now for the biotechnology industry right now is get
your act together. And the potential for consumers to panic in this
country is significant.”


Of course safety standards are already engineered into the
manufacturing of airplanes and cars. But will that work in an
industry which is manufacturing a living thing?


Supporters of the Safety First initiative say there’s too little
oversight on an industry that could have much greater impact on health
and the environment.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Mary Stucky.

Related Links

Government Expands Farm Preservation Program

For almost 20 years, the federal government has paid farmers to convert some of their land to natural habitat for plants and animals. The Conservation Reserve Program is designed to protect the creeks and rivers that border farms. This year, the U.S. Department of Agriculture is expanding the program to take on an additional two million acres, including 132,000 acres in Illinois. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jonathan Ahl reports:

Transcript

For almost 20 years, the Federal Government has paid farmers to convert some of their land to
natural habitat for plants and animals. The Conservation Reserve Program is designed to protect
the creeks and rivers that border farms. This year, the U.S. Department of Agriculture is
expanding the program to take on an additional 2 million acres, including 132,000 acres in
Illinois. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jonathan Ahl reports:


Ted Gilles farms about a thousand acres along the Spoon River in Central Illinois. But the land
closest to the river doesn’t look much like a farm at all. This land was once planted with rows of
corn and soybeans and contained an area for his cattle to graze. Now it has rolling hills with
trees, and an assortment of prairie grasses.


“This here is probably, it’s not in flower now, but this is what they call the grey-headed
coneflower, which is a yellow one. There’s some blooming up there if you see that yellow one
there.”


Gilles is proud to show off the 300 acres of his land that is in the Conservation Reserve
Program. Before it was converted to a natural prairie, the soil, herbicides, and fertilizer from
Gilles’ farm would flow nearly uninhibited into the Spoon River, down to the Illinois, and
eventually to the Mississippi River. Now this land acts as a buffer and a filter. Gilles says he sets
aside time every day to visit his natural preserve.


“Like yesterday morning, I probably saw twenty pheasants in this half a mile, out along the edges,
catching grasshoppers. It’s really nice. It makes you think it’s really worth for it for doing all
this.”


It’s situations like Gilles’ that led to the U.S. Department of Agriculture adding to the
Conservation Reserve Program this year. Paul Gutierrez is the Assistant Deputy Administrator
for Farm Programs at the USDA. He says the CRP is meeting the goals of finding a voluntary
way to get farmers to protect land that is at risk. Guiterrez says the biggest obstacle to getting
farmers to act in a more environmentally friendly manner is finances. He says that’s why CRP
works.


“They still have their mortgage payments out there. They still have operating costs, property
taxes, and if they can look at a way to look at these lands that may not be as well-suited for
farming, and a way to partner up and save the environment, then they are definitely going to look
to help the environment out while still being able to feed their families.”


Environmental groups are generally supportive of the program, but they caution it might not
always be the right way to help rivers and streams. Ken Midkiff is the Director of the Clean
Water Campaign for the Sierra Club. He says while the Sierra Club supports the CRP, they
would like to see something that lasts longer. Midkiff says the program’s biggest weakness is
that farmers only have to protect the land for ten years.


“There’s nothing that prevents a farmer from resigning. But basically the Conservation Reserve
Program is for a set period of time. These are marginal lands, lands that aren’t very productive
for typical corn and soybeans. So we would like to see those set aside for longer periods of time.”


Midkiff says in terms of protecting bodies of water, ten years is barely enough time to undo the
damage that can happen in just one or two years. He also worries that if crop prices go up,
farmers will be quick to pull up native prairie grasses and replant crops.


(sound of nature)


Ted Gilles says low crop prices did get him into the program, and may be why he stays. He is
also a fan of seeing more acres brought into the CRP.


“I think that’s great. I really think that’s the way it should be. I think we have an abundance of
grain and the prices is low. So why not helping everybody by doing it this way, you know?”


Gilles also says he has come to love this portion of his farm, and crop prices would have to be
very high for him to give up on his flowers and pheasants.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Jonathan Ahl.

Related Links

GOVERNMENT EXPANDS FARM PRESERVATION PROGRAM (Short Version)

The federal government is expanding a program to take farmland out of production and temporarily convert it to conservation areas. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jonathan Ahl reports:

Transcript

The Federal Government is expanding a program to take farmland out of production and
temporarily convert it to conservation areas. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jonathan Ahl
reports:


The Conservation Reserve Program is designed to protect rivers and streams by paying farmers to
create buffers between farm fields and the bodies of water. The U.S. Department of Agriculture
is adding two million acres to the project this year.

Fred Guttierez is with the USDA. He says the program works because it’s voluntary.


“We look at it as a way to partner up with the private land owners to take those marginal lands
out of production and to really benefit the environment by doing that.”


Environmental groups are generally supportive of the program, but say it doesn’t go far enough.
Farmers can convert conservation areas back to farming after ten years in the program.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Jonathan Ahl.

Related Links

Low Sperm Counts Linked to Pesticides?

A study last year found that men living in rural areas have lower sperm counts than their urban counterparts. Now, researchers say they’ve found a possible reason for the difference. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chris Lehman has more:

Transcript

A study last year found that men living in rural areas have lower
sperm counts than their urban counterparts. Now, researchers say
they’ve
found a possible reason for the difference. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Chris Lehman reports.

Researchers compared urine samples of men with high and low sperm
counts.
They found that men with low sperm counts were far more likely to have
high
levels of three common pesticides in their urine. Many farmers use the
pesticides to kill weeds and insects on corn, soybeans, and other crops.


Doctor Shanna Swan is a researcher at the University of Missouri. She
says
the study showed that men from all walks of life in the rural areas are
affected, not just those who work directly with the chemicals…


“This is not a study of farmers, it’s not a study of men who work in
industry producing these chemicals. This is the general population.”


Swan says it’s unclear how the pesticides reach the men. She says it’s
likely that men are ingesting the chemicals through their drinking
water.

For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Chris Lehman.

Modified Crops Swap Genes With Weeds

Genetically modified crops are planted throughout the Midwest, but some scientists are concerned genes from these crops could escape and work their way into weedy plants. With these genes, weeds could become more vigorous and harder to kill. New research shows this can happen between closely related crops and weeds. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Cristina Rumbaitis-del Rio prepared this report:

Transcript

Genetically modified crops are planted throughout the Midwest, but some scientists are
concerned genes from these crops could escape and work their way into weedy plants. With
these genes, weeds could become more vigorous and harder to kill. New research shows this can
happen between closely related crops and weeds. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Cristina
Rumbaitis-del Rio prepared this report:


Genetically modified crops have been around for quite a while. In the U.S. last year more than 88
million acres were planted with genetically modified soybean, corn, cotton and other crops. Some
of these plants are engineered to be more resistant to herbicides, making it easier for farmers to
get rid of weeds without damaging their crop. Others are engineered to resist plant-eating insects.


But some scientists worry about the ecological effects of these crops. Allison Snow is a professor
of ecology at Ohio State University. She studies genetically modified sunflowers. Snow says she
got involved in this research when genetically modified crops were first being introduced because
she was afraid no one else was looking at the environmental effects of these crops.


“It was kind out of a fear factor for me of wanting to make sure that someone was watching to see
what the environmental effects might be.”


The sunflowers Snow studies have a gene added to them, which produces an organic insecticide
that kills insects feeding on the plants.


According to Snow, the problem with these pesticide-producing sunflowers is the insect-killing
gene can be transferred from crop sunflowers to their weedy cousins, which are often growing on
the edges of fields. Bees, flies and other insects can transfer the gene to the weeds by cross-
pollinating the plants, which are close relatives. Snow’s research shows once the gene gets into
the weed population, the weeds become insect-resistant as well.


“The new gene worked really, really well in the weeds. It protected them from the insects. And
because they were protected, they had more energy to devote to making seeds.”


Snow says the most startling result was the number of seeds these weeds were making.


“In one of our study sites, they made 55% percent more seeds per plant – just because of one
gene. Which is kind of unheard of. We’ve never seen a result like that – where one gene would
cause the whole population to suddenly start making 55% more seeds.”


The gene might make weeding a more difficult task, but Snow says she wouldn’t quite call them
“super weeds,” a term some environmentalists have used.


“We might see that the weedy sunflowers become worse weeds, I wouldn’t call them super
weeds, because to me that would imply that they have many different features instead of just one
that causes them to make more seeds. But I could imagine in the future there might be enough
traits out there that could turn a regular weed into something much more difficult to control – like
really would be a super weed.”


Snow says she will have to do more research to see if the extra seeds made by the weeds will turn
into more weeds and hardier weeds in farmer’s fields.


But, she might not be able to finish her research on sunflowers because the companies that make
the crop have decided not to renew her funding and won’t give her access to the sunflowers or the
genes.


“It was all about stewardship and responsibility.”


Doyle Karr is a spokesperson for pioneer hi bred, one of the companies which makes the
sunflowers. He says the company realized a few years ago there wasn’t enough demand for the
product to justify commercially producing it. As a result, he says, the company couldn’t continue
funding sunflower research, and doesn’t want to be held responsible for keeping the gene safe
while the research is being conducted.


It’s an issue of a biotech trait that we are not pursuing and not bringing to the market, and if we’re
not bringing it to the market, we can’t justify taking the responsibility of having that trait out
being worked with, with a third party.”


While some academic researchers argue the universities take on legal liability when they work
with genetically modified plants, Karr says the university’s liability is often limited by state law.
He says the company is ultimately held responsible if only by the court of public opinion.


“Should something happen with this gene that was not expected or a mistake happened – that
would ultimately come back to those who initially made the gene available.”


While this issue remains unresolved, Snow is continuing her research. Genetically modified
sunflowers are not the only crop to study. Snow is now working in Vietnam where weedy species
of rice grow naturally, and where genetically modified rice might be introduced in coming years.
She’s concerned the traits of the genetically altered rice might be transferred to the wild species
of rice, just as happened with the sunflowers.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Cristina Rumbaitis-del Rio.

Encouraging Farmers to Enter Alternative Crop Market

Lawmakers in one state are looking at possible incentives to help farmers expand into the lucrative alternative crop market. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Joyce Kryszak has details:

Transcript

Lawmakers in one state are looking at possible incentives to help farmers expand into the
lucrative alternative crop market. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Joyce Kryszak has
details:


New York once had a robust agricultural industry. But it’s taken some hard hits in recent years,
mainly from falling dairy prices. It’s nudged many farmers out of the business – and left fallow
thousands of acres of fertile soil. But state legislators think there may be a cure in the multi-
billion dollar herbal supplement business. They’re working on a plan that would provide
economic incentives to help farmers establish so called “grow zones” for alternative crops, such
as the popular herbal supplement, ginseng. Jim Hayes is a Western New York Assemblyman.
He says it would be a unique partnership that could reinvigorate the state’s farming industry.


“We’re trying to listen to scientists, and doctors, and farmers, and economic development people
to establish a protocol on how to get this thing started. And certainly it’s an area
that is just expanding nationwide, and we believe we should be capitalizing on here in New York
state.”


He says the program would also benefit consumers by developing high standards and controls for
herbal product purity and potency.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Joyce Kryszak.

New Herbicide Raises Safety Questions

Corn growers in Michigan and Minnesota are waiting to find out whether they can use a new herbicide this spring. “Balance Pro” is used in 17 states, including several in the Great Lakes region (Indiana, Illinois, Ohio). But it’s not used in Minnesota, Michigan, or Wisconsin. Critics say Balance Pro gets into rivers and lakes too easily, and it could harm wildlife or even people. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Stephanie Hemphill reports:

Transcript

Corn growers in Michigan and Minnesota are waiting to find out whether they can use a new
herbicide this spring. “Balance Pro” is used in 17 states, including several in the Great Lakes
region (Indiana, Illinois, Ohio). But it’s not used in Minnesota, Michigan, or Wisconsin. Critics say
Balance Pro gets into rivers and lakes too easily, and it could harm wildlife or even people. The
Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Stephanie Hemphill reports:


Four years ago, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency gave conditional approval for a new
weed-killer called Balance Pro. It’s made by a division of Bayer, the same company that makes
aspirin. But the EPA still had some worries.


EPA researchers thought the ingredients in Balance might accumulate in irrigation water. Some
people say, if it turns up in irrigation water, it could turn up in drinking water.


“Missouri has had drinking water reservoirs contaminated with this, and contaminated within the
first year of its use.”


Jannette Brimmer is with Minnesota Citizens for Environmental Advocacy. She worries that
Balance could turn into another environmental problem like atrazine. Atrazine is a commonly
used herbicide. It shows up in drinking water in many parts of the country, at very low levels.
Some studies show, even at those low levels, it’s causing deformities in the sexual organs of
frogs, which might be responsible for reductions in frog populations. And Brimmer wonders if
it might be affecting people too.


“In other words, small dosages at the wrong time in fetal development, pregnancy, in a kid, can
have significant impacts. So we have an opportunity to do the right thing before it gets into our
water, before it poses a health threat, before it’s a problem.”


The EPA doesn’t do any tests to find out whether herbicides affect the hormones of frogs or
people. The agency did conduct tests on the reproduction rates of aquatic animals, and found no
effects.


But the EPA does have one major concern — the effect Balance might have on other crops.
Officials worry if farmers use water polluted with Balance to irrigate crops like cabbage or
lettuce, the herbicide could hurt crop yields.


Both Michigan and Minnesota are trying to figure out how big a threat that might be. Dan
Stoddard, at the Minnesota Department of Agriculture, has been watching the field studies from
other states. He says the results are mixed.


Some of the studies looked at how much Balance got into water supplies. They found lower
concentrations than scientists originally predicted.


But some regions are more vulnerable than others, depending on the type of soil. Dan Stoddard
says areas with coarse or sandy soil, or shallow bedrock, are especially vulnerable.


“What has been considered is some requirements that would restrict use of the product in those
areas. But nonetheless it does have the potential to get into groundwater. What we would
require is additional monitoring to see whether that is in fact happening.”


Stoddard says he’s weighing the risk of polluted water against the benefits Balance might offer.
He’s hearing from companies that have been applying Balance in other states. They say, by
adding the new product to their arsenal, they can cut down on their use of other herbicides.


“If somebody uses the same type of pesticide or herbicide over a few years, weeds can become
resistant and what they wind up having to do is increase the concentration of that product. So
having a new chemistry allows lower application rates of the product.”


Wisconsin recently approved the use of Balance. But the Wisconsin Agriculture Department
there imposed so many restrictions, the company decided not to market it in the state. Bob
Olson is a farmer, active in the Wisconsin Corn Growers Association. He says his state is
putting him at a disadvantage compared to other farmers.


“It’s been registered in 17 other corn states. It’s just not been able to be registered here in
Wisconsin because of what we think are undue concerns. And the fact that we can find it in
increasingly smaller quantities. Simply because you can find something, doesn’t mean that level
is ever going to affect anyone.”


Michigan and Minnesota are planning to decide in time for spring planting whether to let
farmers use Balance in their states.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Stephanie Hemphill.

Popular Herbicide Breeds Resistance

Some weeds are developing a resistance to one of the most popular crop herbicides. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Shawn Johnson reports:

Transcript

Some weeds are developing a resistance to one of the most popular crop herbicides. The
Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Shawn Johnson reports:


Farmers like the Monsanto Company herbicide “Roundup” because it kills a wide variety of weeds
without harming crops genetically engineered to resist it. But in the past few years, crop
scientists say Roundup’s popularity has created some problems. Through survival of the fittest, a
very small number of weeds that were always resistant to Roundup have reproduced, and in some
areas now flourish. Mark van Gessel is a weed specialist at the University of Delaware. He says
it’s a situation some farmers are stuck with:


“I really don’t have a lot of hope that we are going to be able to reverse this trend. We just have to learn to live with it.”


van Gessel says that means farmers will need to get away from exclusive use of Roundup and
other less common herbicides that contain its active ingredient. So far, weeds resistant to
Roundup have popped up in Delaware, Maryland, and California as well as in Tennessee, Ohio,
and Indiana.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Shawn Johnson.

Making Electricity From Grass

Low prices for corn and soybeans have led many Midwest farmers to look for a new crop to mix with their usual rotation. Some are turning to plants grown specifically for what’s called “biomass.” Biomass crops can be used as fuel. While research on biomass is in its infancy… one particular crop has caught the eye of researchers who say it would be perfect for Midwest power plants. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Shawn Johnson reports:

Transcript

Low prices for corn and soybeans have led many Midwest farmers to look for a new crop to mix
with their usual rotation. Some are turning to plants grown specifically for what’s called
“biomass.” Biomass crops can be used as fuel. While research on biomass is in its infancy… one
particular crop has caught the eye of researchers who say it would be perfect for Midwest power
plants. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium Shawn Johnson reports:


In a farm field not too far from the University of Illinois stands a small plot of miscanthus. The
wavy, 12-foot tall grass topped with fluffy, seedless flowers is native to some places in Europe,
where it’s catching on as a crop to burn. Researcher john clifton-brown of Trinity College in
Dublin, Ireland has grown miscanthus on his father’s farm for 12 years now. He says it’s a
natural fit for Illinois.


“You seem to have in Illinois superb soil. You seem to have very low corn prices. You have
rainfall. And these factors combined look like a golden opportunity for the development of
renewable energy from biomass crops like miscanthus.”


Miscanthus is giant grass that can be planted in the same fields that normally grow corn and
soybeans. The similarities pretty well stop there. Where most Midwest farmers are used to
growing crops that produce food, miscanthus is grown specifically to be chopped off, bailed, and
burned, usually with coal in coal-fired power plants.


John Caveny owns the land where this miscanthus plot is growing. He stops short of calling this
a new way of farming:


“Well, in way it is, in a way it isn’t. What all farmers do, when you get right down to it, is
advance the value of sunlight energy. That’s what you do, whether you grow tomatoes, whether
you grow flowers, whether you grow grass, whether you grow corn.”


In the case of growing miscanthus, the process is much different than that of most Midwest crops.
Farmers use multi-row planters pulled behind tractors to plant corn and soybeans. To grow
miscanthus, a producer needs to dig holes and plant sprigs of the grass one at a time to be
successful. The crop will grow back on its own year after year for up to 30 years, but it’s not big
enough to be harvested the first few years its in the ground. Even with all these complications,
University of Illinois researcher Steve Long says a farmer who’s willing to make an investment in
miscanthus can reap great rewards in the long run.

“You do need labor to put this into the ground, but then after that, this is considerably less labor
than corn or soybeans, and on current figures, it is more profitable.”


Those figures are more theory than reality at this point, because a market for miscanthus has yet
to emerge. Dynegy is the only power company that buys miscanthus in this part of Illinois. And
even dynegy won’t be ready to harvest biomass crops on a large scale for another five years. But
the energy company projects it could eventually pay 40 dollars per ton of dried… harvested
miscanthus. That’s pretty good money for the farmers. The reason dynegy will pay that much?
While it doesn’t burn as efficiently as coal… miscanthus emits far fewer pollutants. And while it
emits greenhouse gases such as CO-2 while it’s burning, it will recapture those gases when it
grows. As energy companies are forced to meet more and more environmental requirements,
Dynegy’s Chris Williams says miscanthus becomes appealing:


“It’s getting closer and closer to the cost of coal generation. And you look at that with the
environmental benefits of the biomass, it really makes sense to do the research now to get it into
production as soon as we can.”


Dynegy is looking for farmers to grow miscanthus within a 50-mile radius of one of its central
Illinois power plants. But the company doesn’t know how many farmers it will be able to find.
Even if enough farmers are interested, dynegy is still working out the specifics of harvesting,
shipping, and burning grass effectively.


Miscanthus and biomass crops such as corn for ethanol and soybeans for soy diesel are just part
of a growing renewable energy market. And they face plenty of competition. Hans Detweiller is
with the environmental law and policy center, which advocates renewable energy in the Midwest.
Detweiller says wind and solar power generation are simply more established than biomass right
now:


“Biomass energy has more questions I think in the minds of the public than some of the other
energy sources, but we would like to see more of it. Especially where you can get parallel
benefits such as increased water quality, increased wildlife habitat, things like that.”


Detweiller says miscanthus could fit that billing, but other biomass crops might be more suitable.
Depending upon who you talk to, fields of young aspen or willow trees could even be the biomass
crops of the future. And Detweiller says a native plant like switchgrass is an attractive option
because it does not grow nearly as thick as miscanthus allowing wildlife to forage more freely.


But it’s that thickness that researcher John Clifton brown says makes miscanthus so appealing
and potentially so profitable to a farmer. As he stands next to a wall of miscanthus, Clifton-
Brown says the crop he’s grown in Ireland for a dozen years will only perform better in America.

“So try it. Suck it and see as we say in Europe.”


Clifton-Brown’s miscanthus is harvested only once a year. Others biomass crops are chopped off
a few times. They each have slightly different growing seasons, but all have at least one thing in
common. They represent a future where the energy we mine today could eventually be mowed.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Shawn Johnson.

Biotech Companies Agree to Regional Moratorium

Several biotech companies have agreed not to grow genetically modified crops in Corn Belt states, including Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, parts of Kentucky, parts of Nebraska, and Minnesota. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Natalie Walston reports:

Transcript

Several biotech companies have agreed not to grow genetically modified crops in Corn
Belt states, including Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, parts of Kentucky, parts of
Nebraska, and Minnesota. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Natalie Walston reports:


Twelve biotech companies including Monsanto and Dow agreed to the moratorium. In
states where the corn might contaminate nearby fields planted with crops for human
consumption.


Lisa dry is with the Biotechnology Industry Organization in Washington, D.C.
She says the companies won’t grow corn and safflower used for medicines.


“This is pharmaceutical production, it is not agricultural or food production. We are
taking every single possible precaution to make sure that it stays in its intended use
channel and does not end up in the food or feed.”


Dry says commercial grocers, exporters, and food processors have been concerned about
the Starlink scandal of 2000, when genetically modified corn approved for animal feed
turned up in 300 varieties of taco shells, tostadas and chips. The biotech companies say
they will grow crops in non-traditional areas such as Hawaii, Arizona, and Puerto Rico.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Natalie Walston.