Energy Costs to Shoot up:
Energy costs are going to keep increasing faster than the rest of the cost components in the tea industry. The industry needs to take urgent & bold decisions on energy policy to mitigate this cost escalation. The countdown has begun. We are already the highest costing in the international market.
Crude Oil has tested $100 a barrel; Coal is already showing signs of increased demand that will push prices up very fast; Gas too will keep climbing & as it is, the natural gas supplies in the tea areas that have traditionally been on gas, are not getting their requirements . As an industry these prices are not in our hands but they will certainly make us feel the heat.
Let us look at the scenario:
1. India is set to become the 3rd largest importer of oil by 2025 (just behind the USA & China) - International Energy Agency (IEA).
2. Power requirement will more than triple by 2030. Most of this generation is on coal – coal requirement will increase more than 300% by then. And the prices ?!!!
3. Natural gas that has been the preferred fuel in many tea growing districts is now being diverted to other industries (like Fertilizers) and the industry is being forced to go onto alternative fuels.
4. Alternative sources of energy –
i. Wind Energy – a wonderful clean source that is largely going un-tapped. However, this has had very little success in the country as i) it is uncertain ii) high up-front costs (low load factor of 20-25%) & iii) Large land requirements (20 acres per MW).
ii. Solar energy – technology for the future but we have to wait a long time to see the technology improving and this becoming a source that is economical. At present the cost per unit is between Rs.15/- to Rs.30/- as compared to Rs.2/ to Rs.6/- for thermal energy. And then the photovoltaic cells & panels have to be replaced every 7 to 8 years.
In this scenario what are the options to the industry:
1. Those on oil firing need to switch to Coal immediately.
2. Those on gas too need to take off some of their driers onto coal & seeing the writing on the wall, fully convert over a period of 2 years.
But the coal prices are also going to keep increasing dramatically. Remember the industry has no control on the prices of oil, gas & coal. It is the market forces (tea is an insignificant player) that will drive these. But are our competitors also going to be affected as bad as us? Yes and no. Their fuel prices will rise with the market like in our case, BUT some of them depend on self generated fuel wood-for a major part of their energy requirement. The fuel-wood cost is in your hands and it is not going to increase very much.
So, as starters, I suggest that the industry may need to –
1. Generate as much fuel wood as possible.
2. Supplement the coal fuel with fuel-wood, ‘brickets’ of whatever is available locally (like ‘bagas’ from sugarcane, etc.)
3. Install steam boilers for all the energy needs except transport fuel. This would be the best and most sustainable, as long as you generate enough fuel. But in case you do not have enough at present, then put in a smaller boiler & supplement your energy requirements.
4. How do we increase our fuel-wood:
a. Reduce your shade replacement cycle. Keep planting new rows so that in 8 to 10 years shade trees are replaced. As the weather has become more erratic shade regulation must also be adopted to reduce the effect of the vagaries of weather & to increase crop.
b. Plant all road sides, fencings (use trees for posts that can be periodically lopped for fuel & then replaced), vacant areas with quick growing fuel trees that can take pollarding / coppicing.
c. Plant fuel-wood in vacant areas and manage them by regenerating fuel by doing intensive management of fuel. This entails irrigation (when required), fertilizer application, retaining the root system while harvesting and regenerating fuel at least 3 times. Then doing replacement planting just a year before the 3rd round of harvesting.
d. Encourage workers to grow these fuel trees in their compounds and then buy these off them at an agreed price.
Some estates have already started on large scale plantations of ‘bio-fuels’. What I would like to ask is that for plantations where we could be using fuel-wood as direct source of fuel, is it going to be more economical for us to grow bio-fuels or go in for Fuel-wood ? The industry needs to take a call on this and also take the government on board for subsidies for fuel-wood generation. And if in these fuel plantations we are following a 7 year cycle is there any chance of Carbon Credit for at least part of the area?
Thursday, November 22, 2007
Monday, August 13, 2007
Indian Tea Industry under pressure:
The scenerio for the Indian tea industry is not looking too good for the balance of this year.
Indian tea exports are down. And exports from
1. CTC teas (bulk of what will be produced for the rest of the season, will have lower export enquiry & lower price realization, because –
a)
b) Some of the bigger CTC exporters, like McLeod Russel India, will find better value in domestic market, because of the rupee being the strongest it has been in almost a decade. This will put further pressure on the domestic CTC prices as supply will outstrip demand & that too with better quality teas.
c) The bottom of the market will continue to fall.
2. ORTHODOX – This will continue to perform better on the back of Sri Lankan crops having dropped. However, the internal production has been very high and so the dream run will now ease out. It will be easier to get export orders for these than the CTCs for the rest of the year.
3. South India will come under more pressure as the exports have declined by almost 5 million & North Indian teas are going to be cheaper.
4. Branded tea exporters have also lost money because of the strengthening of the Rupee.
Saturday, July 28, 2007
Cost of Control ?!
I am often told in discussions that a certain sprayer might be good , as you say, but it is too expensive, or that a certain operation (cultural) is too costly, or a chemical... What we must realise is that the cost is not the cost of these individually, but the COST of CONTROL is what really matters. If you use the right equipment in the correct manner, your chemical & mandays cost will come down & your cost of control could be much lower.
Thursday, July 19, 2007
Insects to Pests to Monsters
Are we turning Insects into Pests & Pests into Monsters ?
For over six decades the gullible farmer has been regularly bombarded with the triumphant pronouncements of the pesticide manufacturers, about their production of newer & more deadlier chemicals that would eradicated all pests and thus increase yields. Each new chemical, (an improved molecule) better than before…. ‘this one sure to eliminate the pest’. He has been pushed on to ‘the treadmill of chemical control’ and the belief that ‘salvation lies only at the end of a spraying nozzle’.
But these insecticides are not selective poisons; they do not single out the target species…. they successfully kill many beneficial insects… In most cases pesticide use actually –
1. increase the number of target pests
2. fosters new pests
3. creates demands for new or more toxic pesticides.
Scientists explain that, in many ways, pesticides free or liberate pests from control by their natural enemies:
1. The predator tends to suffer greater mortality in the long run than the pests because the latter are more resistant to insecticides.
2. Most natural enemies have longer generation times, are less abundant, and are slower to recover from the effects of poisoning than pests.
3. Natural enemies contract larger doses of pesticides since they forage over greater areas in search of food.
4. Lastly, herbicides often remove weeds that provide nourishment and refuge for beneficial insects & alternative food to certain insects.
We are neglecting the golden opportunity to prevent, even while we seek to cure/control. The single strategy of chemical control has become an economic disaster for the tea industry. What Claude Alvares had to say in the 1960s sounds so appropriate today “Once every potent chemical has been used & found wanting, there is simply no alternative but to return to traditional & less toxic means of controlling the insects that modern farming methods have turned into pests.”
The pests are becoming monsters. Look at the havoc Helopeltis is causing?! We see the current state of what disaster Looper is causing in Northeast India ( & two new species have landed up ?!! … were these just insects till yesterday ?) , Red Spider Mite ?!!
The problem is ever increasing; environment is being battered by all sorts of chemicals but insects are proliferating. And to make things worse our systems of control are wanting, equipment not appropriate and method of spraying is not targeting the pests.
1. Inappropriate coverage:
a. When spraying system is inappropriate –
i. the weaker members of the insect population are being weeded out. So in many areas and among many species only the strong & fit remain to defy our efforts to control them.
ii. as the dosages are not lethal to these that survive/escape they tend to build resistance.
2. Prophylactic Spraying:- We manage to kill predators/natural enemies more than the pests. The pests are not visible & so the spray is not targeted at the pests. With the natural enemies reduced the pests actually are aided in their build up.
Let us take a look at what happens to Red Spider Mite.
“ Why does the spider mite appear to thrive on insecticides? Besides the obvious fact that it is relatively insensitive to them, there seems to be two other reasons. In nature it is kept in check by various predators such as ladybugs, a gall midge, predacious mites & several pirate bugs , all of them extremely sensitive to insecticides. The second reason has to do with population pressure within the spider mite colonies. An undisturbed colony of mites is a densely settled community, huddled under a protective webbing for concealment from its enemies. When sprayed, the colonies disperse as the mites, irritated though not killed by the chemicals , scatter out in search of places where they will not be disturbed. In so doing they find a far greater abundance of space and food than was available in the former colonies. Their enemies are now dead so there is no need for the mites to spend their energy in secreting protective webbing. Instead they pour all their energies into producing more mites. It is not uncommon for their egg production to be increased threefold – all through the beneficent effect of insecticides.” – Rachel Carson (‘Silent Spring’)
It is a matter of historical record that not one, among the one million plus species of insects has been eradicated by man. On the contrary, they continue to proliferate.
“We must change our philosophy, abandon our attitude of human superiority and admit that in many cases in natural environments we find ways and means of limiting populations of organism in a more economical way than we can do it ourselves.” - Canadian entomologist, G.C. Ullyett in 1950 s.
“ In nature there is normally a balance between the 10 per cent “bad” insects and the 90 per cent “good” insects. When such a balance is established, there is no outbreak of pests and the plants in the area are healthy.
The bad ones , which are carnivorous, prey on the good insects that serve as their food. So long as there is equilibrium in their forces, there is no pest outbreak of any sort that would ruin crops and farmers’ harvests. The good insects harmlessly go about their business of pollinating plants and otherwise protecting plants by destroying the bad guys.
But destroy that equilibrium and you have pest infestation every time the bad bugs win. And they always win whenever insecticides are used to “eradicate” them.
For reasons now known to entomologists, the pests survive while the farmer-friendly insects are annihilated by poisons. Hence, the balance remains in favour of the pests under a poisoned environment. This condition is one when there is infestation and destruction of crops.” - Domigngo C. Abdadilla
Safety: How ‘safe’ are these chemicals ? The most determined effort should be made to at least reduce the usage of the plethora of chemicals that now contaminate our teas, food, our water supplies, and our atmosphere, because they provide the most dangerous type of contact – minute exposures, repeated over and over throughout the years.
“ A laboratory animal living under highly controlled and artificial conditions, consuming a given amount of a specific chemical , is very different from a human being whose exposures to pesticides are not only multiple but for the most part unknown , immeasurable, & uncontrollable. Even if ‘x’ parts per million of a chemical on the lettuce in his salad were ‘safe’, the meal includes other foods, each with allowable residues, and the pesticides on his food are, as we have seen, only a part, and possibly a small part, of his total exposure. This piling up of residues from many different sources creates a total exposure that can not be measured. It is meaningless, therefore, to talk about the ‘safety’ of any specific amount of residue,”
Leaving aside the question whether these legal residues are as ‘safe’ as they are represented to be, there remains the well-known fact that farmers frequently increase the prescribed dosages, use the chemicals too close to the time of harvest, use several insecticides where one would do,…
We need to re-look at the efficacy and commercial benefits of the excessive & often indiscriminate chemical usage. Are we really benefiting? Have the pests reduced? Have the yields increased? Let us seriously try to integrate into our system alternative and less toxic means of managing insects.
scroll down to a post in June 2006 on Looper Caterpillar control
For over six decades the gullible farmer has been regularly bombarded with the triumphant pronouncements of the pesticide manufacturers, about their production of newer & more deadlier chemicals that would eradicated all pests and thus increase yields. Each new chemical, (an improved molecule) better than before…. ‘this one sure to eliminate the pest’. He has been pushed on to ‘the treadmill of chemical control’ and the belief that ‘salvation lies only at the end of a spraying nozzle’.
But these insecticides are not selective poisons; they do not single out the target species…. they successfully kill many beneficial insects… In most cases pesticide use actually –
1. increase the number of target pests
2. fosters new pests
3. creates demands for new or more toxic pesticides.
Scientists explain that, in many ways, pesticides free or liberate pests from control by their natural enemies:
1. The predator tends to suffer greater mortality in the long run than the pests because the latter are more resistant to insecticides.
2. Most natural enemies have longer generation times, are less abundant, and are slower to recover from the effects of poisoning than pests.
3. Natural enemies contract larger doses of pesticides since they forage over greater areas in search of food.
4. Lastly, herbicides often remove weeds that provide nourishment and refuge for beneficial insects & alternative food to certain insects.
We are neglecting the golden opportunity to prevent, even while we seek to cure/control. The single strategy of chemical control has become an economic disaster for the tea industry. What Claude Alvares had to say in the 1960s sounds so appropriate today “Once every potent chemical has been used & found wanting, there is simply no alternative but to return to traditional & less toxic means of controlling the insects that modern farming methods have turned into pests.”
The pests are becoming monsters. Look at the havoc Helopeltis is causing?! We see the current state of what disaster Looper is causing in Northeast India ( & two new species have landed up ?!! … were these just insects till yesterday ?) , Red Spider Mite ?!!
The problem is ever increasing; environment is being battered by all sorts of chemicals but insects are proliferating. And to make things worse our systems of control are wanting, equipment not appropriate and method of spraying is not targeting the pests.
1. Inappropriate coverage:
a. When spraying system is inappropriate –
i. the weaker members of the insect population are being weeded out. So in many areas and among many species only the strong & fit remain to defy our efforts to control them.
ii. as the dosages are not lethal to these that survive/escape they tend to build resistance.
2. Prophylactic Spraying:- We manage to kill predators/natural enemies more than the pests. The pests are not visible & so the spray is not targeted at the pests. With the natural enemies reduced the pests actually are aided in their build up.
Let us take a look at what happens to Red Spider Mite.
“ Why does the spider mite appear to thrive on insecticides? Besides the obvious fact that it is relatively insensitive to them, there seems to be two other reasons. In nature it is kept in check by various predators such as ladybugs, a gall midge, predacious mites & several pirate bugs , all of them extremely sensitive to insecticides. The second reason has to do with population pressure within the spider mite colonies. An undisturbed colony of mites is a densely settled community, huddled under a protective webbing for concealment from its enemies. When sprayed, the colonies disperse as the mites, irritated though not killed by the chemicals , scatter out in search of places where they will not be disturbed. In so doing they find a far greater abundance of space and food than was available in the former colonies. Their enemies are now dead so there is no need for the mites to spend their energy in secreting protective webbing. Instead they pour all their energies into producing more mites. It is not uncommon for their egg production to be increased threefold – all through the beneficent effect of insecticides.” – Rachel Carson (‘Silent Spring’)
It is a matter of historical record that not one, among the one million plus species of insects has been eradicated by man. On the contrary, they continue to proliferate.
“We must change our philosophy, abandon our attitude of human superiority and admit that in many cases in natural environments we find ways and means of limiting populations of organism in a more economical way than we can do it ourselves.” - Canadian entomologist, G.C. Ullyett in 1950 s.
“ In nature there is normally a balance between the 10 per cent “bad” insects and the 90 per cent “good” insects. When such a balance is established, there is no outbreak of pests and the plants in the area are healthy.
The bad ones , which are carnivorous, prey on the good insects that serve as their food. So long as there is equilibrium in their forces, there is no pest outbreak of any sort that would ruin crops and farmers’ harvests. The good insects harmlessly go about their business of pollinating plants and otherwise protecting plants by destroying the bad guys.
But destroy that equilibrium and you have pest infestation every time the bad bugs win. And they always win whenever insecticides are used to “eradicate” them.
For reasons now known to entomologists, the pests survive while the farmer-friendly insects are annihilated by poisons. Hence, the balance remains in favour of the pests under a poisoned environment. This condition is one when there is infestation and destruction of crops.” - Domigngo C. Abdadilla
Safety: How ‘safe’ are these chemicals ? The most determined effort should be made to at least reduce the usage of the plethora of chemicals that now contaminate our teas, food, our water supplies, and our atmosphere, because they provide the most dangerous type of contact – minute exposures, repeated over and over throughout the years.
“ A laboratory animal living under highly controlled and artificial conditions, consuming a given amount of a specific chemical , is very different from a human being whose exposures to pesticides are not only multiple but for the most part unknown , immeasurable, & uncontrollable. Even if ‘x’ parts per million of a chemical on the lettuce in his salad were ‘safe’, the meal includes other foods, each with allowable residues, and the pesticides on his food are, as we have seen, only a part, and possibly a small part, of his total exposure. This piling up of residues from many different sources creates a total exposure that can not be measured. It is meaningless, therefore, to talk about the ‘safety’ of any specific amount of residue,”
Leaving aside the question whether these legal residues are as ‘safe’ as they are represented to be, there remains the well-known fact that farmers frequently increase the prescribed dosages, use the chemicals too close to the time of harvest, use several insecticides where one would do,…
We need to re-look at the efficacy and commercial benefits of the excessive & often indiscriminate chemical usage. Are we really benefiting? Have the pests reduced? Have the yields increased? Let us seriously try to integrate into our system alternative and less toxic means of managing insects.
scroll down to a post in June 2006 on Looper Caterpillar control
Saturday, April 28, 2007
Thursday, April 26, 2007
A New Tea Pest
On my visit to Darjeeling last week, a new pest was located in Glenburn Tea Estate. It is a caterpillar that was seen causing fairly extensive damage, mainly to Pruned sections. TRA has since picked up samples of the pest to try and identify it.
The damage is being caused like done by a Red Slug and it is also eating up a part of the soft stem, which eventually keels over & dies. The nature of damage could cause tremendous damage to crops, if it spreads.
I am attaching the first photographs taken by me of this pest.
The damage is being caused like done by a Red Slug and it is also eating up a part of the soft stem, which eventually keels over & dies. The nature of damage could cause tremendous damage to crops, if it spreads.
I am attaching the first photographs taken by me of this pest.
Sunday, January 21, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)