Beware of the bouncing gas price

Have you been watching prices at the gas pump these days? If you have, you know they’ve been bouncing all over the place—down a couple cents one day and up a quarter the next.  It’s sort of like a game where you follow the bouncing ball, never knowing where it’s going it end up. And it’s even more fun because we all know that gasoline prices, no matter how high they rise this year, are still a lot lower than a year ago. The Iowa Department of Natural Resources monthly survey (www.iowadnr.gov/news/fuel.html) shows that prices at the pump are about $1.50 per gallon lower than the prices in July of 2008, when a gallon almost set you back $4.

The problem is that you have no control over this bouncing ball. Someone else—most likely someone in a foreign country—has a tight grip on much of the world’s petroleum and has a lot of influence in determining oil prices today, and where they will go in the future.

It’s short-sighted, and frankly naïve, to think that America is past the energy crisis that gripped us last year.

That’s why it’s critical for the country to push forward on research and innovation into developing more biofuels, wind energy and other technologies to replace the petroleum we import from foreign countries. It’s just as important to boost our energy exploration efforts to expand sources of oil, natural gas, coal and other energy sources. These can help wean our country from the tightening grip of foreign oil. And, even with the price lower at the pump, we’ve got to keep up conservation efforts and find ways to make each gallon go farther.

All of these points —research, innovation, exploration and conservation—are in the comprehensive energy policy which was developed last year by the Iowa Farm Bureau Federation. And they are just as important today as they were when it was developed last year as gas prices edged to, and sometimes past, $4 per gallon. That’s why we continue to ask consumers to “Join the Ride”( www.jointherideiowa.com/) to a better energy future.

A far-reaching comprehensive energy policy is critical because the factors that led to the fuel price spirals in 2008 have not gone away. It’s a pretty good bet that when the world economy begins to recover, the gasoline prices will rebound and will begin to march right back to the levels reached in 2008, or even higher, once again putting consumers over a barrel.

Then there’s the uncomfortable fact so much of the petroleum we use is pumped out of the ground in nations that are unfriendly to the United States. You can bet those governments are searching for ways to jack up prices again, drive up our trade deficit and throw another punch at our economy.

Sure it’s kind of fun to watch gasoline prices jump up and fall down. But the country’s energy policy is not fun and games and we can’t afford to lose focus on the real issue: the need to develop a long-term and comprehensive energy policy. Otherwise, the $4 gas prices we saw last year, might seem like they were from the good old days.

Written by Dirck Steimel
Dirck is the news services manager for Iowa Farm Bureau.

Label Me Confused

Volcanic eruptions. Floods. Poison ivy. All are considered “natural,” but none, upon mention, are likely to elicit a positive reaction. So why are some consumers assuming that food products with ambiguous “natural” labels are necessarily healthier, safer or more environmentally-friendly?

Recently, Dean Foods, the nation’s largest organic dairy producer, announced that it will market a line of “natural” milk and yogurt (http://www.chicagotribune.com/health/chi-natural-foods-10-jul10,0,834771.story), which set off a debate about what is a “natural” food product. In fact, there is no regulatory definition for “natural” food – with the exception of meat (http://www.fsis.usda.gov/FactSheets/Meat_&_Poultry_Labeling _Terms/index.asp) – so the label is really just a soothing suggestion that meddlesome men haven’t messed with Mother Nature. However, it’s no guarantee of safety or nutrition.

As a case in point, the U.S. natural food market grew by 10 percent to $12.9 billion from 2007 to 2008 according to the Nutrition Business Journal, and still the national obesity rate climbs at an alarming rate (http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/trends.html). Not even increased organic food consumption is necessarily making us healthier. That’s because there is no conclusive evidence showing that organic food is more nutritious than conventionally grown food, according to the Mayo Clinic (http://www.mayoclinic.com/ health/organic-food/NU00255). Organic foods meet the same quality and safety standards as conventional foods. So while there are many reasons people buy organic food, they shouldn’t be doing it just to lose weight.

Let’s go beyond the labels, back to the basics. The truth is that there’s no substitute for a balanced diet and exercise. Research shows that Americans consume 150 to 300 more calories per day than they did 30 years ago according to registered dietician Sally Barclay. About one-half of these extra calories come from sweetened caloric beverages such as soda, sports drinks and juice drinks. An extra 100 calories per day could cause you to gain 10 pounds in a year. There’s your health problem!

You’ve heard it before. We’re each responsible for our own health. We need to eat less overall and start eating more of the right kinds of food. If you need help with that, the U.S. Department of Agriculture has a great nutrition resource, http://www.mypyramid.gov/. The website includes everything from tips for planning healthy meals to a personally-tailored nutrition plan that accounts for an individual’s age, gender, weight, height, and physical activity. The site also reviews tips for effective physical activity to improve your health.

I’ve used the website myself, and it turns out that the “natural” hops in my brew won’t guarantee me a “beach body.” I guess I’ll have to look beyond the label for the answers to my nutrition and safety questions.

Written by Zach Bader
Zach is a Communications Specialist for Iowa Farm Bureau.