Best of our wild blogs: 14 Apr 09


Basket of feathers
on the annotated budak blog

Yellow Lipped Sea Krait @ Pulau Hantu
video clip on the sgbeachbum blog

Back to Berlayar at dawn
on the wild shores of singapore blog and blooming Saga tree

The nesting season is on ...
on the Bird Ecology Study Group blog

Hornbill breeding in the Jurong Bird Park
on the Bird Ecology Study Group blog

St. John’s Island coastal cleanup by Deutsche Bank
on the News from the International Coastal Cleanup Singapore blog

Why We Need To Study Geohacking - Dangers of Reconfiguring The Planet's Ecology from The Daily Galaxy: News from Planet Earth & Beyond


Read more!

Trail at country club not a proper jogging track

Straits Times Forum 13 Apr 09;

PUB, the national water agency, thanks Mr Steve Choo for his feedback on the closure of the jogging track within Singapore Island Country Club.

The path that Mr Choo is referring to is not a proper jogging track but a dam which crosses in front of the teebox at the Singapore Island Country Club's New Course.

Jogging along this route is not only very dangerous as joggers may be hurt by golfers teeing off, but it is also trespassing on private property. Members of the public are advised to use safer alternative routes linking MacRitchie and Upper Peirce reservoirs.

Once again, we thank Mr Choo for his feedback.

Tan Nguan Sen
Director, Catchment and Waterways
PUB, the national water agency


Read more!

Got Nature? Why You Need to Get Out

Andrea Thompson, livescience.com Yahoo News 13 Apr 09;

NEW YORK - In our increasingly urbanized world, it turns out that a little green can go a long way toward improving our health, not just that of the planet.

That could mean something as simple as a walk in the park or just a tree viewed through a window. It's not necessarily the exercise that is the key. It's the refreshing contact with nature and its uncomplicated demands on us.

Here is how it works: Modern life - commuting, computing, paying taxes - can place a burden on our brains and bodies. In recent years, scientists at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign's Landscape and Human Health Laboratory and elsewhere have compiled evidence that suggests that a connection to nature is vital to our psychological and physical health because it helps recharge our brains so that we're better able to cope with the stresses in life.

This ingrained dependence on our environment is like that of any other animal it seems, because like other organisms, we evolved to thrive in our natural surroundings, said Frances (Ming) Kuo, director of the laboratory. Kuo's colleague William Sullivan discussed this topic earlier this month at a symposium, "Exploring the Dynamic Relationship Between Health and the Environment," at the American Museum of Natural History here.

"It's out there in real life; people can see it," Kuo told LiveScience.

Urban shift

In 2007, it was estimated that more than half of the world's population lived in urban, rather than rural, areas for the first time in human history.

Urban environments, with their traffic and harried pace, are a constant drain on our mental resources because we have to work to pay attention to a myriad of stimuli.

Similarly, animals taken out of their natural habitats can start to degrade mentally and physically - parenting skills decline, aggression increases and playful activity stops. Some of these same symptoms can be seen in particularly stressed human populations.

Nature, on the other hand, is a little kinder to our craniums.

"In evolution, those of us who found it - nature - sort of inherently interesting probably were more likely to remember where the berries were" or where a specific threat was, Kuo explained. "And so the idea is that we're selected for being interested in relevant natural phenomena."

So thanks to evolution, we don't have to work to pay attention to nature - it, well, naturally interests us. Several studies conducted by Kuo and her colleagues show that exercising this easy interest in nature, even unconsciously, seems to improve our ability to pay attention and react to stressful situations.

Green vs. non-green

In a 2001 study detailed in the journal Environment and Behavior, Kuo and her colleagues surveyed parents of children aged 7 to 12 who had been diagnosed with an Attention Deficit Disorder. They asked the parents to rate activities that seemed to alleviate their child's symptoms and which seemed to aggravate them.

They found the children functioned better after a "green" activity (i.e. one that likely took place in a natural setting, such as fishing or soccer) than a "non-green" one (such as watching TV or playing video games).

Kuo and her colleagues think the improvement stems from nature's ability to capture our attention involuntarily, giving the hard-working, overtaxed part of our brain used to voluntarily focus our attention on more demanding tasks a break, essentially allowing it to recharge.

A series of studies conducted by Kuo's lab in public housing around Chicago found similar results.

The researchers interviewed a number of female residents of public housing projects. Each subject was randomly assigned to rooms that had views of trees or grass outside and ones that looked out on barren courtyards.

People living in public housing "have fatiguing lives, and not particularly rejuvenating home circumstances," Kuo said. "They're just much more likely to be at the end of their rope on any given day."

Through the interviews, the researchers found that residents whose apartments were exposed to green spaces reported fewer aggressive conflicts, including domestic violence, than those who that had no views of green spaces. They also procrastinated less on major goals, such as finding a job or a new home, and were less likely to think their problems were unsolvable.

Having our capacities for attention restored, "allows us to be our best selves, so we are able to inhibit impulses that we want to be able to inhibit; we can take the long view of things; we can think better," Kuo said.

These benefits can reach beyond an individual person to the community or even society, by strengthening community ties and helping disadvantaged populations better cope with and solve their problems.

"When you take the individual effects, and then you magnify it by the fact that people around you share that same environment, you can actually imagine that they're really, really significant effects," Kuo said.

For example, greener areas also had lower crime rates and more socializing between neighbors.

Where there are trees and other greenery outside buildings, "what you see is people are using the outdoor spaces more often, and as a consequence, they actually run into each other," Kuo said. And with more people using the spaces, there are more "eyes on the street," which could deter crime.

The green spaces are "kind of the seed around which strong neighborhoods grow," Kuo said.

Physical health

Access to green spaces can lead to improvements in physical health too, other studies have found.

One study of 80- to 85-year-olds conducted in Tokyo found that those with access to green space had a lower rate of mortality, even when socioeconomic status was taken into account.

Another study in the United Kingdom found that the health disparities normally seen between the wealthy and non-wealthy disappeared when access to green areas was factored in.

One study conducted in Indianapolis found that children in greener neighborhoods had a reduced risk of being overweight or obese.

"All their findings are kind of pointing in the same direction," Kuo said.

Kuo said that the connections between green spaces and health could be applied to daily life, both at the individual and community levels.

After a hard day at work, maybe do a little gardening before starting in on the taxes, or, if you're a student, play some soccer before studying for that test. (Kuo said that nature isn't the only thing that can help us rejuvenate in this way - reading a book for pleasure, listening to music or spending quiet time with friends and family can also help by easily engaging us while letting our brains rest.)

Cities and other communities can also use this information, and several already have.

Chicago recently undertook a $10 million tree-planting initiative - the largest in city history. They also used a large chunk of the federal funds for rehabbing the city on landscaping, which Kuo was told was done partly because of the findings of her studies.

Washington, D.C., Philadelphia and New York also have city greening initiatives running or in the works.

"So it seems like policy folks are paying attention," Kuo said.

But even with the benefits that Kuo and others have seen their studies, there still may be more links not yet discovered.

"We're finding all these ways in which the environment matters to us and affects, but I don't think we're done," she said.


Read more!

Attenborough warns on population

BBC News 13 Apr 09;

The broadcaster Sir David Attenborough has become a patron of a group seeking to cut the growth in human population.

On joining the Optimum Population Trust, Sir David said growth in human numbers was "frightening".

Sir David has been increasingly vocal about the need to reduce the number of people on Earth to protect wildlife.

The Trust, which accuses governments and green groups of observing a taboo on the topic, say they are delighted to have Sir David as a patron.

Fraught area

Sir David, one of the BBC's longest-standing presenters, has been making documentaries on the natural world and conservation for more than half a century.

In a statement issued by the Optimum Population Trust he is quoted as saying: "I've never seen a problem that wouldn't be easier to solve with fewer people, or harder, and ultimately impossible, with more."

The Trust, which was founded in 1991, campaigns for the UK population to decrease voluntarily by not less than 0.25% a year.

It has launched a "Stop at Two" online pledge to encourage couples to limit their family's size.

Other patrons include Jonathan Porritt, chairman of the UK Sustainable Development Commission, and Dame Jane Goodall, founder of the Jane Goodall institute.

BBC environment analyst Roger Harrabin said population was a fraught area of debate, with libertarians and some religious groups vehemently opposing measures by governments to influence individual fertility.

In turn, the Trust accuses policy makers and environmentalists of conspiring in a "silent lie" that human numbers can grow forever with no ill-effects.

In January 2009, Sir David revealed that he had received hate mail from viewers for not crediting God in his nature programmes.

His most recent documentary focused on how Charles Darwin came up with the theory of evolution and why it remained important.

David Attenborough to be patron of Optimum Population Trust
Parminder Bahra, Times Online 14 Apr 09;

Sir David Attenborough said yesterday that the growth in global population was frightening, as he became a patron of an organisation that campaigns to limit the number of people in the world.

The television presenter and naturalist said that the increase in population was having devastating effects on ecology, pollution and food production.

“There are three times as many people in the world as when I started making television programmes only a mere 56 years ago,” he said, after becoming a patron of the Optimum Population Trust (OPT) think-tank.

“It is frightening. We can’t go on as we have been. We are seeing the consequences in terms of ecology, atmospheric pollution and in terms of the space and food production.

“I’ve never seen a problem that wouldn’t be easier to solve with fewer people, or harder, and ultimately impossible, with more. Population is reaching its optimum and the world cannot hold an infinite number of people,” Sir David, who has two children, said.

The OPT counts among its patrons the environmentalist Jonathon Porritt and the academic Professor Sir Partha Dasgupta. However, Sir David’s appointment has already been criticised. Austin Williams, author of The Enemies of Progress, said: “Experts can still be stupid when they speak on subjects of which they know little. Sir David may know a sight more than I do about remote species but that does not give him the intelligence to speak on global politics.

“I have a problem with the line that people are a problem. More people are a good thing. People are the source of creativity, intelligence, analysis and problem-solving. If we see people as just simple things that consume and excrete carbon, then the OPT may have a point, but people are more than this and they will be the ones to find the solutions.” Sir David said that the OPT was drawing attention to the issue of population and being a patron seemed a worthwhile thing to do.

Roger Martin, the chairman of the trust, said that the appointment would put pressure on organisations to face up to the issue of population: “The environmental movement will not confront the fact that there is not a single problem that they deal with which would not be easier with fewer people.”

The trust campaigns for global access to family planning and for couples to be encouraged to stop having more than two children. In Britain it wants to stabilise the population by bringing immigration into balance with emigration and making greater efforts to reduce teenage pregnancies.

Mr Martin said that the UK population must be reduced to a sustainable level because Britain was already the most overcrowded country in Europe.He said the world could not increase production to meet the needs of a growing population: “We can’t feed ourselves with some of the most intensive agriculture in the world — we’re only 70 per cent self-sufficient.”

Mr Martin said that Britain could not rely on the world food market because, when food runs short, exporters do not export it: “Last year, we saw India and China banning exports of rice when there was a shortage.”

A MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH

The first scholar to bring overpopulation to the fore was the Rev Thomas Malthus. His academic work in the late 18th and early 19th centuries outraged and inspired succeeding generations (Tim Glanfield writes).

Malthus grew up in Guildford, Surrey, the youngest of eight siblings, and during his childhood encountered some of the great minds of his age. His father was a friend of the philosophers David Hume and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and the young Malthus needed little encouragement to study mathematics at Cambridge.

He made his name with a landmark text, An Essay on the Principle of Population, published in six editions between 1798 and 1826 and underlined by strong scepticism for future human generations.

Malthus believed that all previous generations had included a “poor” underclass created by an inherent lack of resources in the world that would continue if population growth were not addressed. His theory is summarised by his assertion that “the power of population is indefinitely greater than the power in Earth to produce sustenance for Man”.

He saw two significant variables in the world, those that are positive and raise the death rate — famine, disease and war — and those that are preventive and lower the birthrate — birth control, abortion, celibacy and postponement of marriage.

In practising the preventive measures and gradually reducing poor laws, Malthus argued, society would no longer “create the poor which they maintain”.

The expectations of population growth outlined in his essay had a significant influence on Darwin’s evolutionary theories and many modern political theses, but Malthus remains a controversial and much vilified scholar. Shelley branded him “a eunuch and a tyrant”, Marx as “the principal enemy of the people” and Lenin called his work a “reactionary doctrine”.

Sir David Attenborough backs campaign to limit human population
The Telegraph 14 Apr 09;

Sir David Attenborough has said that a "frightening explosion in human numbers" was behind every threat to wildlife across the world.

The veteran broadcaster made his comments as he became patron of a group seeking to cut the growth in human population.

The Optimum Population Trust (OPT) believes Earth may not be able to support more than half its present numbers before the end of the century.

In a statement released on the organisation's website, Sir David, 82, said: "I've seen wildlife under mounting human pressure all over the world and it's not just from human economy or technology - behind every threat is the frightening explosion in human numbers.

"I've never seen a problem that wouldn't be easier to solve with fewer people, or harder, and ultimately impossible, with more.

"That's why I support the OPT, and I wish the environmental NGOs would follow their lead, and spell out this central problem loud and clear."

The trust, which was founded in 1991, wants the UK population to decrease by not less than 0.25% a year and has launched a "Stop at Two" pledge to encourage couples to voluntarily limit the size of their families.

World population is projected to rise from 6.8 billion today to 9.1 billion in 2050, it says.

OPT chairman Roger Martin said he was "delighted" to welcome Sir David as patron and added: "All serious environmentalists know perfectly well that population growth, exploding in the 20th century, has been a key driver of every environmental problem.

In January, Sir David revealed he received hate mail from viewers for not crediting God in his nature programmes.

His latest documentary on Charles Darwin and natural selection marked two centuries since Darwin's birth and 150 years since the groundbreaking On the Origin of Species was published.


Read more!

Mangroves can save lives in cyclones

UPI News 13 Apr 09;

DURHAM, N.C., April 13 (UPI) -- A study of the 1999 super cyclone that hit eastern India suggests villages shielded from the storm surge by mangrove forests fared better than other areas.

The study by researchers at India's University of Delhi and Duke University in the United States analyzed deaths in 409 villages in the poor, mostly rural Kendrapada District of the Indian state of Orissa, just north of the cyclone's landfall. It showed areas protected by mangrove forests experienced significantly fewer deaths than did less-protected villages.

Mangroves are dense forests of trees and shrubs that grow in brackish, low-lying coastal swamps in the tropics and subtropics.

"Our analysis shows a clear inverse relationship between the number of deaths per village and the width of the mangroves located between those villages and the coast," said Duke University Professor Jeffrey Vincent. "Taking other environmental and socioeconomic factors into account, villages with wider mangroves suffered significantly fewer deaths than ones with narrower or no mangroves.

"We believe this is the first robust evidence that mangroves can protect coastal villages against certain types of natural disasters," he added.

Vincent conducted the analysis with Saudamini Das of the University of Delhi. Their findings appear in the early online early edition of The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.


Read more!

Overfishing to wipe out bluefin tuna: WWF

Reuters 13 Apr 09;

MADRID (Reuters) - Overfishing will wipe out the breeding population of Atlantic bluefin tuna, one of the ocean's largest and fastest predators, in three years unless catches are dramatically reduced, conservation group WWF said on Tuesday.

As European fishing fleets prepare to begin the two-month Mediterranean fishing season on Wednesday, WWF said its analysis showed the bluefin tuna that spawn -- those aged four years and older -- will have disappeared by 2012 at current rates.

"For years people have been asking when the collapse of this fishery will happen, and now we have the answer," said Sergi Tudela, Head of Fisheries at WWF Mediterranean.

The fish, which can weigh over half a tonne and accelerate faster than a sports car, are a favorite of sushi lovers. Demand from Japan has triggered an explosion in the size of the Mediterranean fleet over the past decade and many of those boats use illegal spotter planes to track the warm-blooded tuna.

"Mediterranean (Atlantic) bluefin tuna is collapsing as we speak and yet the fishery will kick off again tomorrow for business as usual. It is absurd and inexcusable to open a fishing season when stocks of the target species are collapsing," added Tudela.

Environmental groups condemned an agreement signed in November by states setting bluefin quotas -- a body dominated by EU members. The groups called it "a disaster" and "a disgrace," saying the states again chose to ignore their own scientists and set quotas 47 percent higher than recommended.

Illegal fishing is also rife for the bluefin, the dried, dark red meat of which once fed Roman armies on the march.

Growing numbers of restaurants and retailers including Carrefour's Italian supermarkets are boycotting it.

WWF said that analysis of official data showed the average size of mature tunas had more than halved since the 1990s and that this has had a disproportionately high impact since bigger fish produced many more offspring.

The bluefin can only be saved by a compete halt to fishing in May and June as the fish rush through the Straits of Gibraltar to spawn in the Mediterranean, WWF and other campaign groups say.

(Reporting by Ben Harding)

Mediterranean bluefin tuna stocks collapsing now as fishing season opens
WWF 14 Apr 09;

Rome, Italy – As the Mediterranean’s bloated fishing fleets ready themselves for the opening of the bluefin tuna fishery tomorrow, WWF has released an analysis showing that the bluefin breeding population will disappear by 2012 under the current fishing regime.

Global conservation organization WWF reveals that the population of breeding tunas has been declining steeply for the past decade – and will be wiped out completely in 3 years if fisheries managers and decision-makers keep ignoring the warnings from scientists that fishing must stop.

“Mediterranean bluefin tuna is on the slippery slope to collapse, and here is the data to prove it,” said Dr Sergi Tudela, Head of Fisheries at WWF Mediterranean. “Whichever way you look at it, the Mediterranean bluefin tuna collapse trend is dramatic, it is alarming, and it is happening now.

“WWF has no choice but to again urge the immediate closure of this fishery.”

The population of tunas that are capable of reproducing – fish aged 4 years or over and weighing more than 35kg – is being wiped out. In 2007 the proportion of breeding tuna was only a quarter of the levels of 50 years ago, with most of the decline happening in recent years.

Meanwhile, the size of mature tunas has more than halved since the 1990s. The average size of tuna caught off the coast of Libya, for example, has dropped from 124kg in 2001 to only 65kg last year. Data gathered by WWF show that this pattern has been observed across the entire Mediterranean.

Before the age of large-scale industrial fishing, individual tunas could even weigh in at 900kg. The loss of these giant tunas – able to produce many more offspring than medium-sized individuals – has a disproportionately high impact on the reproduction of the species.

The huge overcapacity of fishing fleets, catches that far exceed legal quotas, pirate fishing, the use of illegal spotting planes to chase the tunas, under-reporting of catch, fishing during the closed season, management measures disregarding scientific advice – and the insatiable appetite of the world’s luxury seafood markets – have all contributed to this dramatic decline.

“For years people have been asking when the collapse of this fishery will happen, and now we have the answer,” added Dr Tudela. “Mediterranean bluefin tuna is collapsing as we speak and yet the fishery will kick off again tomorrow for business as usual. It is absurd and inexcusable to open a fishing season when stocks of the target species are collapsing.”

WWF is calling for the immediate closure of the Mediterranean bluefin tuna fishery to give the species a chance to recover, while continuing to encourage consumers, retailers, restaurants and chefs to join the global movement to avoid the consumption of the imperilled fish.

There is also growing support to suspend international trade of Atlantic bluefin tuna by getting it listed on Appendix I of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) when contracting parties meet in early 2010.


Read more!

Biomass 'worse than fossil fuels'

BBC News 13 Apr 09;

Biomass power could become one of the worst emitters of greenhouse gases, the Environment Agency (EA) has warned.

Ploughing up pasture to plant energy crops could produce more CO2 by 2030 than burning fossil fuels, it said.

The EA's study of biomass fuels also found waste wood and MDF produced the lowest emissions, while willow, poplar and oil seed rape made the highest.

The agency has called on the government to force biomass companies to report all greenhouse gas emissions.

Wood-burning stoves, boilers and even power stations are seen by many as critical to Britain's renewable energy targets.

Biomass is considered low carbon as long as what is burnt is replaced by new growth, and harvesting and transport do not use too much fuel.

'Role to play'

But the EA's report Biomass: Carbon Sink or Carbon Sinner found that the greenhouse gas emission savings from such fuels were highly variable.

At its best, biomass could produce as little as 7kg of CO2 per kilowatt hour - 98% less than coal, saving around two million tonnes of CO2 every year.



However, the study also found that in some cases overall emissions could be higher than those of fossil fuels.

This was particularly true where energy crops were planted on permanent grassland, it said.

Tony Grayling, head of climate change and sustainable development at the Environment Agency, said biomass could play a role in helping the UK meet its renewable energy targets.

But he argued the credibility of biomass rested on tough sustainability criteria and called on biomass projects to combine heat and power production.

"Biomass is a limited resource, and we must make sure it is not wasted on inefficient generators that do not take advantage of the emissions savings to be made from combined heat and power," he said.

"By 2030, biomass fuels will need to be produced using good practice simply to keep up with the average carbon intensity of the electricity grid."


Read more!

Water worries cloud future for U.S. biofuel

Carey Gillam, Reuters 13 Apr 09;

KANSAS CITY, Missouri (Reuters) - It's corn planting time in the U.S. Plains, and that means Kansas corn farmer Merl "Buck" Rexford is worrying about the weather -- and hoping there is enough water.

Rexford plans to start seeding his 7,000 acres near Meade, Kansas, this week and he is relishing a recent heavy snow storm that dropped several inches of much-needed moisture.

Like corn farmers throughout the United States, Rexford hopes to grow a healthy crop yielding more than 150 bushels an acre this year. Much of his crop will wind up at a nearby ethanol plant.

And that puts the 65-year-old Rexford at the center of a bitter divide over biofuels, particularly corn ethanol.

Critics argue that precious water resources are being bled dry by ethanol when water shortages are growing ever more dire. Federal mandates encouraging more ethanol production don't help.

Proponents say corn ethanol for transportation fuel is far better for the environment, national security and the economy than oil and the first step toward cleaner fuel sources.

"We really have to ask ourselves, do we want to be driving with renewable fuels or with gasoline made from petroleum resources," said Brent Erickson, executive vice president at the Biotechnology Industry Organization, which backs ethanol.

Corn ethanol's future is already muddied by concerns that it requires a substantial amount of energy to produce and that heightened demand makes corn more costly in human food and livestock feed. Now, with climate change concerns mounting and drought becoming more of a problem in many areas, the water-intensive nature of creating ethanol also is a growing concern.

"Biofuels are off the charts in water consumption. We're definitely looking at something where the cure may be worse than the disease," said Brooke Barton, a manager of corporate accountability for Ceres, a group backed by institutional investors focused on the financial risks of climate change.

Corn is a particularly thirsty plant, requiring about 20 inches of soil moisture per acre to grow a decent crop, but most corn is grown with rain, not irrigation. Manufacturing plants that convert corn's starch into fuel are a far bigger draw on water sources.

Water consumption by ethanol plants largely comes from evaporation during cooling and wastewater discharge. A typical plant uses about 4.2 gallons of water to make one gallon of ethanol, according to the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy.

The ethanol industry pegs that at about 3 gallons of water to 1 gallon of fuel.

WASHINGTON PLAN

Washington lawmakers and the White House have been encouraging the use of ethanol as an alternative fuel to help lighten the nation's costly dependence on foreign oil.

But the moves are meeting opposition from many groups who fear that population growth and climate change are combining in ways that will leave not only the United States, but the world, with too little water. Many ethanol plants are located in agricultural areas -- close to the corn, but also close to other users who need a lot of water to operate, such as hog farmers and cattle ranchers.

"We're headed in the wrong direction and this problem is not going away," said Mark Muller, program director at the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy. "This water issue is like the financial crisis... and I'm afraid something awful is going to happen."

The group says much of the Corn Belt stretching through Iowa, Illinois, Nebraska, Minnesota and Indiana has enough water for all, but water availability could challenge the ethanol industry in areas including greater Chicago, western Iowa and Nebraska, and generally west of the Missouri River.

"Water use could be a limiting factor (for ethanol) if we don't introduce and support more water-saving technologies, " added the Institute's Jim Kleinschmit.

"Water is a worry," agreed Heritage Foundation senior policy analyst for energy and environment Ben Lieberman. "When we expand corn ethanol as we have with these federal mandates," he said, "we are starting to see corn in more marginal areas that may need more irrigation. We are seeing increased water use not just for the processing plants but also the water in growing the corn."

Last month, a coalition of environmental, agricultural, business and consumer groups asked the Obama administration not to raise the amount of ethanol blended into gasoline without further study.

Ethanol supporters don't dispute the water-intensive nature of the industry. But they say much of the corn crop relies on rain from the skies, not pumped out of the ground, and even irrigation systems are improving to reduce water usage by almost half. More water-efficient production plants are also reducing water use. In January 2009, there were 170 ethanol plants operating in the United States and 24 more new or expanding plants.

In 2008, the United States led the world in ethanol production, generating 9 billion gallons, or 52 percent of the world production. That is up from 6.5 billion gallons of U.S. ethanol in 2007, according to the Renewable Fuels Association. The U.S. aims for 15 billion gallons by 2015.

THIRSTY WORLD

Freshwater consumption worldwide is expected to rise 25 percent by 2030 due largely to world population growth from 6.6 billion currently to about 8 billion by 2030 and more than 9 billion by 2050, according to Ceres.

Some believe crop biotechnology could offer at least a partial solution, and several companies are racing to develop corn that is drought-tolerant, including Monsanto Co, which hopes to launch a product in 2012.

DuPont Co.'s Pioneer Hi-Bred unit plans to roll out a low-water conventionally produced corn as early as 2010.

Back in Kansas, farmer Rexford would welcome a more drought-hardy corn seed. Water to irrigate his crop is getting harder and more expensive to come by.

Still, farmers need the premiums selling their corn for ethanol can bring, he said, just as much as the nation needs to break free from dependence on foreign oil.

"If farmers go out of business you'll have a lot worse crisis than an oil crisis," he said.

(Reporting by Carey Gillam, editing by Peter Henderson and Cynthia Osterman)


Read more!