Deregulation of Hydro
Although energy tends to be a relatively small component in the cost of raising swine, it adds up. Some interesting and positive things in energy and communications have been occurring in Ontario and North America over the last couple of years.You have probably been inundated with telemarketers and commercials, all vying for your long distance bill. Thiswas unheard of even five years ago.
In the natural gas business, Union Gas, Centra Gas (these two are now joined) and Consumers Gas are the main Ontario players. Although the commercial-industrial sector has enjoyed a deregulated market for almost 10 years, it was only about two years ago that the natural gas business began opening up for everyone (propane was always deregulated).
Now you can buy your gas from any number of suppliers, but it will always be delivered to your farm by one of the suppliers already in existence.
The decision-making process is a bit bewildering, and it can be difficult to compare just who has the best deal, just as in the telephone business. On April 1, Ontario Hydro will be split into three companies. One will generate and sell bulk electricity in the North American market.
One will be responsible for maintaining the grid and delivering electricity purchased by farmers from whomever they want plus provide default supply of electricity.
The last will be responsible for operation of the wholesale market, scheduling generation and transmission and administering settlements at the wholesale level.
What will this mean to farmers, commonly at the end of the line on the electricity system and with great distance between them, relative to the millions of customers in the Greater Toronto area, for example? For one, the existing program for rural rate assistance you have been receiving for years will continue. Also, service and maintenance of lines will continue, as a separate organization mentioned above.
The big question will be how rates will work out. Again, much will depend on size and purchasing power. Late December, it appeared prices would remain at or close to the current pricing scheme.
The new pricing system will look something like this:
* The actual price of the energy will not be regulated, amounting to 40 to 50 per cent of the customer's bill* What will be regulated is the cost of the transmission and distribution of the energy. These wire tariffs will be regulated by the Ontario Energy Board (OEB)
* The current Ontario Hydro will provide power at a default supply price to anyone. This price will be calculated based on administration costs (regulated) and spot price averaged over a period of time (not regulated)
The plus side of all this is that the opportunities for much friendlier forms of power will finally have a chance to make a go. These include micro hydro dams in remote areas on a small scale; wind and solar, including hot water heating; biomass; and co-generation systems with natural gas and other fossil fuels. Although the actual economics probably won't change much, seemingly endless power supply possibilities are available. Now is a good time to review your energy requirements and reflect on how you can reduce them. An energy audit via the Environmental Farm Plan is a good idea.
The Ontario Agricultural Training Institute offers a renewable energy course on demand and there are many suppliers of renewable energy systems around.
Also, keep informed of the deregulation and what your farm organization is preparing. For example, the Ontario Federation of Agriculture and the greenhouse growers both have their own natural gas purchasing groups that buy in bulk and pass savings on to members.
Opportunities exist for joint ventures among livestock producers to pool manure and burn methane in an engine-generator set, making electricity and eliminating odours while stabilizing the nutrient values.
Finally, the most effective method known to reduce utility bills is conservation. Insulation, top-quality fans, heating systems, proper control settings and management all can have rapid paybacks.
Ron MacDonald is an agricultural engineer with Guelph-based Agviro, Inc.
© copyright 1999 Agricultural Publishing Company Limited.
back
Chimney ventilation
New technology for old barns
BY DON STONEMAN
Chimneys, closed-in air passages that lead from the stables to the roof, are a common method of ventilating pigs and other livestock in bank barns in western Ontario's Mennonite country. Modern electronics are making them better.Mennonites have been installing chimneys in bank barns for 20 or 30 years, says Wellesley dairy farmer and electronics whiz Lorne Lantz. OMAFRA engineer Franklin Kains adds that he has seen chimneys in photographs of barns dating back to the beginning of the century.
"When we don't have hydro as an option for the Old Order [a chimney] is an awfully nice device," Kains says.
Some of the traditional-style, two-storey barns used to house pigs and other livestock are nearly 100 years old. Others are newly constructed, often with materials salvaged from old barns elsewhere. Many of these structures house a farrowing room upstairs and feeder pigs below. The chimneys are typically several feet square, and draw warm air from the stable up the passage to a stack that rises several feet above the barn roof. Air flow is controlled with a "butterfly" damper inside the air passage. When the barn becomes too warm, the damper is opened, allowing the warm air to be drawn out the top. When it's colder, the damper is closed.
Good temperature control requires that a farmer be in the barn much of the time. If the barn manager is in town when a winter storm blows in, the temperature in the barn may fall, chilling the pigs.
Enter Lorne Lantz and his electronic controls. Lantz has developed a control for an actuator, a small electric motor, that opens and closes the dampers. It requires little electricity and can run off a 12-volt car battery. In barns without electricity, the battery is charged with a solar panel. The control itself, which contains a thermostat, is an 8 x 6 x 4-inch box. The actuator measures 10 x 10 x 5 inches.
Lantz says that the controller can keep the temperature within a 1C degree range in a barn during the late fall, winter, and early spring. A manual function lets the farmer shut the dampers if he has the doors open to ship pigs and wants to maintain barn temperature.
Chimney-vented barns have some advantages over side-vent barns, Lantz says. Chimneys are almost immune to changes in wind direction. Side vents "take an enormous amount of power to open and close."
Every barn is a challenge, says Lantz. "These are not cookie cutter barns." The thermostat must be located away from the chimney to give accurate readings.
Chimney ventilation doesn't work in every situation, Lantz notes. A silo beside the barn will prevent a chimney from drawing. And on hot, humid days when the air is still, chimneys often won't draw air either.
Lanz and Kains agree that chimneys have their limitations in the summer.
Chimneys tend to work because of the "buoyancy" of warm air, Kains says.
It is the difference in temperature between inside barn air and outside air that makes the chimneys draw. In the summer, when there is less temperature difference, the chimneys don't draw as well. That's also when livestock need more air flowing through - "10 to 20 times as much" to keep them comfortable, Kains says.
That's why bank barn operators often install big exhaust fans to blow air down the length of the barn, or just reduce livestock density. Some farmers put exhaust fans in the chimneys to draw air through, Kains says.
Chimneys work best when the chimney itself is warm, Kains says. That requires the damper to be installed at the top of the chimney rather than at the bottom. Chimneys also work better when they are insulated with foam. Uninsulated chimneys tend to drip condensation into the barn below.
High chimneys are most effective, Kains says. Forty-foot chimneys running through the upstairs of a bank barn work better than 10-foot-high running up a single storey.
But Lantz sees the potential for chimneys in single storey barns as well. He recently retrofitted a modern pig barn, connecting the chimney into an airbag system that prevents cold air from dropping onto pigs. True winter weather will put the system to the test.
© copyright 1999 Agricultural Publishing Company Limited.
back
Some feed mill math
On-farm feed manufacturing represents the largest portion of hog feed in Ontario. It is estimated that 75 per cent of Ontario's hogs are raised on home-mixed rations.Based on five million hogs expected to be grown out this year in the province, and 335 kg of feed per hog produced, total feed production would be about 1.68 million tonnes. The home-mixed portion of this then would be about 1.26 million tonnes. To put this in an economic perspective, the value of all hog feed produced in Ontario would be over $336 million per year.
With these numbers in mind, a good look at the different systems used to manufacture feeds, and some estimated costs, is warranted.
Most home-mixed rations in Ontario are still manufactured using proportioner mills (Mix Mill or Farmatic). These systems require little labour because during the operation the farmer can perform other tasks. The main time required is adding a bag of premix into the hopper, which in some cases has been automated through the use of bulk premix bins.
Other time requirements include calibrating the systems whenever major ingredients change in weight or moisture. Although most of those systems now use dry corn along with soymeal and premix, some systems still make use of the economics of high-moisture corn usually harvested at 25-per cent moisture.
Mill math - Dry corn shows the estimated costs of using dry corn as the base ingredient on 100-, 200- and 500-sow farrow-to-finish farms. In each example, costs were adjusted to show different volumes required. Mill math - Wet corn shows a similar example using high-moisture shelled corn as the base ingredient. Note that silos were used in place of bins for initial costs, and a savings in drying costs on the corn of $12 per tonne (25-per cent moisture) was deducted off the bottom line.
Interesting to see that on the 500-sow farrow-to-finish operation using high-moisture shelled corn, the producer was actually making money making feed. Due to the fact that high-moisture corn above 25-per cent moisture does not flow in feeders very well, larger farms with larger finishing barns have opted to use liquid feeding systems to manufacture feeds.
Mill math - Liquid feed shows examples of 1,800- and 3,200-head finishing barns using water, 25-per cent high-moisture corn, soybean meal and premix as their ingredients for comparison purposes.
Some liquid feed systems utilize food byproducts to help offset initial investments even further. These systems also allow information on feed intake and growth rates to be stored for evaluation.
There is a definite trend to using more batch mixer systems in Ontario. Benefits of these systems include record-keeping data, batch printouts and flexibility of ingredients used. To compare the economics with other systems, farmers could follow the models used in the first two mill scenarios.
Reviewing all these different systems shows that the average costs of manufacturing feed on the farm in Ontario is an estimated $4 per tonne. High-moisture corn has a large economic impact on feed costs, especially in finishing barns where 65 per cent of the total feed on a farrow-to-finish operation is used. Ken Palen is livestock specialist with Kenpal Farm Products, Centralia
© copyright 1999 Agricultural Publishing Company Limited.
back
Raising the boar bar
Chinese genes make trek to Woodstock-area barn in new Genex Meishan hybrid
BY ROBERT IRWIN
If Gerry Huinink's unusual pigs meet expectations, they could raise the bar another notch for pork producers trying to maximize productivity.Huinink hopes the legendary prolificacy of his animals' Chinese ancestors will deliver an extra two pigs at weaning.
Aside from the fact their noses are a little shorter than the York and Landrace pigs he's used to, Huinink's Manor Meishan hybrids look like any other pig. "They're a little more aggressive toward each other but they are more docile than conventional pigs at farrowing," Huinink observes.
The Chinese genes have taken a long time to make their way from their homeland to Huinink's new barn near Woodstock. The trip began in the early 1980s when a consortium of British breeding companies imported Meishan pigs for research at several British universities.
National Pig Development Company (NPD), which was recently reborn as Genex in Canada, was heavily involved in the original studies. The company says producers can wean at least 30 pigs per sow per year. "She brings an awful lot of advantages, principally from a reproductive aspect and not simply litter size. Return to estrus, milking ability, and lactational ability are considerably better than the conventional white lines," explains Genex nutritionist John Cosgrove.
Huinink can attest to that. Since his gilts began farrowing Oct. 7 he's had "above average numbers born," with some litters as large as 18.
Robust offspring have reached 50 pounds within 50 days. Their growth has easily kept pace with a group of 50 conventional Genex hybrid gilts brought in at the same time.
Huinink bred all gilts artificially to boars from the Genex stud. Artificial insemination was uncharted territory for the veteran producer.
Before depopulating and demolishing his converted bank barn, which his father acquired with the farm 50 years earlier, he had used his own boars for natural insemination.
His new 76 x 198-foot barn is designed to house 150 sows and their offspring through to market weight. There are three farrowing rooms, three nursery rooms and two sections for market hogs.
With the wisdom that comes with 30 years' working with pigs, Huinink is cautious about making rash predictions for his novel herd. "The real test will come in three years," as sows begin reaching the higher parity numbers and have some meaningful production records, he predicts.
Cosgrove says carcass quality and lean distribution are still being evaluated, but the line "is considerably further along than the purebred Meishan." Early studies with a tiny research sample have shown a minor index point disadvantage for the Meishan hybrid, but Cosgrove emphasizes the line is a "prototype, genotype," still under development.
"I don't think it's in Genex's or the producers' interest to assume that because these genetics are in place they ought to go for them," Cosgrove warns. He says University of Aberdeen research suggests the pure Meishan may require special management to deal with the "substantially different way" the Meishan partitions energy and protein.
Data collected at Huinink's will be included with information compiled by Genex from Meishan Manor herds in commercial herds in Alberta, Manitoba and Saskatchewan. The company has been experimenting with Meishan lines imported from the U.S. for about three years.
Genex also imported purebred lines known as the Upton Meishan from Britain. Last year as part of a plan to expand numbers fivefold, Genex established a 200-sow, caesarian section-derived nucleus herd outside of Regina.
Huinink says despite some of the unknowns he decided on Manor Meishans for two reasons: "It's worth it even if I only get one more pig;" and Meishans "put a little more interest in the pig business."
Huinink certainly has the skill to handle whatever challenges are posed by unproven genetics, but he also seems to possess a unique ability to anticipate industry trends. He dismisses his timing as "luck," but the fact is he hasn't yet had to ship production from his new herd.
That means he has avoided the disastrous prices being paid to fellow producers, the same way he did when he depopulated in advance of the industry shakeout in 1979.
© copyright 1999 Agricultural Publishing Company Limited.
back
Resistance isn't residue
Although our low hog prices have taken front stage in the media, the issue of antibiotic usage in livestock and especially antibiotic usage as growth promotants continues to be a major concern around the world.Amidst all this heightened interest, however, I have detected some confusion about how the terms "antibiotic resistance" and "antibiotic residues" are being used. Indeed, the reports pouring out from the EU's vote to ban four growth promotants frequently mention that antibiotics in meat is one of the causes for the ban.
These two terms get confused and are perceived by the consumer to be nearly synonymous. Many consumers have the misunderstanding that the use of antibiotic growth promotants leads to residues in meat.
We need to be very clear in our minds what the difference between these terms is so we can assure consumers of the safety of the pork on our tables.
Residues
A residue is what is left in the pig after a product has been used. In other words, if an antibiotic has been used to treat an animal, it takes some time before it is eliminated from the body of the animal.The length of time it takes for elimination varies with the antibiotic, the dose, the species and age of animal, and also with how severely ill the animal is at time of treatment.
In addition to antibiotics, residues may include toxic chemicals, insecticides, hormones, mycotoxins, or others. The consumer is, rightly, concerned that after antibiotics are used as treatment or as growth promotants, antibiotic residues might be left in pork.
We can assure all consumers, however, that we observe strict withdrawal times that are imposed for all antibiotics and this assures us that antibiotic residues will not remain in our pork. These withdrawal times have been established after thorough research over many years.
In addition, regulatory authorities are continually testing meats looking for residues. Violations draw strong penalties. Violations are very seldom found. They occur in about 0.1 per cent of carcasses tested. When the (rare) violation occurs, it can usually be traced back to an honest mistake or oversight, not to any purposeful violation or malicious intent. Nevertheless, penalties are enforced.
Resistance
Antibiotics are designed to kill or inhibit bacteria. Antibiotics, however, do not kill all the bacteria that they are aimed at. Some bacteria are naturally resistant to the antibiotic.Remember the story of penicillin? Antibiotics are, for the most part, products produced by other microorganisms that have been around for millions of years. Originally, all antibiotics were harvested directly from these microorganisms. Later, scientists learned to make the same and newer antibiotics in laboratories without having to rely on the original microorganisms.
Some bacteria long ago developed resistance to certain antibiotics. They had to, or else they would have been killed off by their antibiotic-producing neighbours. Hence, some resistance was present long before we even used our first antibiotic. Other bacteria developed resistance because of repeated use (and abuse) of antibiotics.
All in all, bacteria have devised numerous methods whereby they are able to avoid being killed.
What's the danger?
The mere mention of antibiotic resistance grabs the attention of many groups - MDs, media, consumers, regulatory agencies, and others. There is the fear that antibiotic-resistant bacteria might get on undercooked meat and cause disease in people, who then cannot be cured because the bacteria are already resistant to antibiotics.Some of the confusion occurs here. There is also the perception that antibiotics might be accumulating in the animal and might cause resistance to occur when we eat the meat.
The former concern has been debated for over three decades. That debate has heated up considerably in the last 12 to 18 months and will continue until we reach some resolution. On the latter concern, we can at least assure consumers that antibiotic residues are not present in pork.
S. Ernest Sanford, DVM, is with Boehringer Ingelheim Vetmedica (Canada)
© copyright 1999 Agricultural Publishing Company Limited.
back