6 hours ago, robblok said:

I don't know but don't you understand that its not about solving a problem but taking a cut from those selling sugarcane harvesting machines. 

 

I always thought the burning happened after the harvest. (cant be 100% sure I am not an expert).

 

Though if they really want to solve the problem then this is of course better then banning the burning alone as that is leaving farmers without solutions. If this is workable then it would be a good 2 prong solution banning and giving a way out. 

 

However my lack of knowledge about the process makes it so I can't be sure this will help.

An investigation into inlaws and friends might be in order, just to make sure there's no pecuniary interest

with tracks maybe...

That and the cutter has wheels so there is always the same distance from the ground.

It's a sweet smell in the air here at work, they have been harvesting (with harvester) around 2000 rai of sugarcane the last couple of weeks around here so it's really a sweet smell in the air!

In my home town there is a sugar beet factory about 20km away.
If the wind blows in the right direction you could recognise a sweet smell as well.

Sugarcane sugar costs 26 baht a kg
 
In Europe white sugarbeet sugar costs 22 baht a kg in the supermarket
 
so they better buy it from europe and stop with the sugarcane.

That is not a real price.

The EU is heavily subsidising sugar beet growers to protect them from cheaper cane sugar, mostly from Brazil.

7 hours ago, robblok said:

I wish I knew, i don't know enough about the process, but I do know you can't just ban something and not give an alternative. So maybe this is useful but on the other hand I can't see as I don't know the process.

 

Just banning burning (good idea) without an alternative that is not too costly time consuming (bad idea to not help with an solution) will not work.

 

So I get that it should be a two pronged attack of the problem however I am not sure that this solution is viable. 

 

But I wait for the farming experts to chip in on this one.

Burning takes place prior to harvesting, basically it removes all the outer dead/green leaves and only the stalks remain for harvesting, thus cutting down on labour and time.

When a harvesting machine is used it strips the leaves from the stalks, however better than burning on  the field after harvesting they could collect and incinerate the leaves to produce energy/power to be more efficient, then put the ashes back onto the field for fertiliser.

17 minutes ago, CLW said:

That is not a real price.

The EU is heavily subsidising sugar beet growers to protect them from cheaper cane sugar, mostly from Brazil.

Oh i see, well if those brasilian producers also burn their fields their sugar will get banned anyway soon and they can stop with subsidizing.

Oh i see, well if those brasilian producers also burn their fields their sugar will get banned anyway soon and they can stop with subsidizing.

Wishful but unlikely.
You can't just ban imports of any product just because of the production process.
Examples are also gmo soybeans, tomatoes from China or cheap steel or coal.
You'll also likely to get problems with the WTO and bilateral tensions.
For example, if the EU would stop to import cane sugar from Brazil they could stop their exports of soybean and beef as well as kick out German carmakers.

So that's I Billion for the farmers - to be evenly distributed through the honest,  province Governors and Puu-Yai Bans...…….

Five Billion for distribution to the Upper Crust ?

9 hours ago, bluesofa said:

I'm probably asking something too obvious here, but how does burning the cane enable harvesting?

Gets rid of the chaff making the cutting job easier and transportation more compact and efficient.

9 hours ago, bluesofa said:

I'm probably asking something too obvious here, but how does burning the cane enable harvesting?

They burn the leaves so there less Trash and the cane will be cleaner to go to the mill less trash more money for the cane.

In Australia they are not aloud to burn the cane ,, only sometimes for standover cane that's 2 years old and has too much trash and only up to 10% of the whole farm . What's this the government buying harvesters to cut the cane ? In Australia people buy a harvester and cut  the cane for a fee for up 30,000 acres contract. why can't they do that here ? there are people with money to buy a harvester  and cut  10/20/30 farms of cane . Oh crap this is Thailand  the Government has to bail the farmers out of trouble.  ????

2 hours ago, CLW said:

Wishful but unlikely.
You can't just ban imports of any product just because of the production process.
Examples are also gmo soybeans, tomatoes from China or cheap steel or coal.
You'll also likely to get problems with the WTO and bilateral tensions.
For example, if the EU would stop to import cane sugar from Brazil they could stop their exports of soybean and beef as well as kick out German carmakers.

France proposed it, i bet many other EU countries love that idea...me included.

 

And are there tomatoes from china in Europe? I've never seen them, we should ban them anyway...nothing wrong with Italian, Spanish tomatoes.

 

Steel and coal are not easy to replace but i'm sure Europe can do it...and german cars will be sold anyway, just like in thailand where they always were double price if imported.

I have looked into this. It does not appear to be a simple solution. This problem exists in Australia, Hawaii, and many other areas. I would love to see some solutions found. The air here has been atrocious, and cane burning is partly responsible for it. But, so it diesel. Diesel trucks, pickup trucks, cars and power plants. None are needed. They are only manageable if very well maintained, and how many Thais maintain their vehicles up to manufacturer standards? 

 

Alloway canefarmer Neville Cayley said he had largely moved to green but occasionally needed to burn.

"When people criticise cane burning they're criticising our work, our job and our livelihood," Mr Cayley said.

"I've largely moved to green cane cutting but when we rotate to use the block for small crops more, it's cost effective and there's less wear and tear on the machinery to burn instead of ploughing it in," he said.

"And leaving the trash destroys the block for future small crops."

Bundaberg farmer Jack Banks no longer burned cane but said he was in a fortunate position that he could wait for a bailing company to remove the cane trash.

"It takes a while, first they rake it up then another guy comes and bails it up and then a few days later the bails get picked up," Mr Banks said.

"Farmers leasing their land need to have the ground ready to go as quickly as possible and burning is a lot quicker."

 

https://www.news-mail.com.au/news/burn-off-a-hot-topic/2332625/

 

Here is a link to a very highly detailed study on mechanical harvesting in Thailand. It does appear that it would benefit the industry, and could really help to clean up the air. Frankly, I am quite astonished that this administration would even come up with a plan like this. May be one of the only times in the last five years, they are doing something to benefit the nation. Upcoming elections?

 

https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jsam1937/70/2/70_51/_pdf

 

 

 

11 hours ago, robblok said:

I don't know but don't you understand that its not about solving a problem but taking a cut from those selling sugarcane harvesting machines. 

 

I always thought the burning happened after the harvest. (cant be 100% sure I am not an expert).

 

Though if they really want to solve the problem then this is of course better then banning the burning alone as that is leaving farmers without solutions. If this is workable then it would be a good 2 prong solution banning and giving a way out. 

 

However my lack of knowledge about the process makes it so I can't be sure this will help.

They burn the cane to rid it of leaves thus making harvest easier. I have been to Kanchanaburi when the burning takes place you cannot see down the road 10 feet in front of you. I have said many times the Bangkok smog problem is from this burning. Sugar cane is becoming a big cash crop and more farmers are growing it so more burning. A few years ago this was never an issue in Bangkok only in the last 2 or 3 years has it appeared and this is as more cane is grown in areas around Bangkok. This is the first story I have read putting the blame on the sugar cane growers.

Wonder where that money will disappear to?

wouldn't it be cheaper to raise fines and finance special police units who control it? 

17 hours ago, robblok said:

I don't know but don't you understand that its not about solving a problem but taking a cut from those selling sugarcane harvesting machines. 

 

I always thought the burning happened after the harvest. (cant be 100% sure I am not an expert).

 

Though if they really want to solve the problem then this is of course better then banning the burning alone as that is leaving farmers without solutions. If this is workable then it would be a good 2 prong solution banning and giving a way out. 

 

However my lack of knowledge about the process makes it so I can't be sure this will help.

They burn sugarcane before harvesting because the cane is too leafy to cut easily.

1 hour ago, Aussie999 said:

They burn sugarcane before harvesting because the cane is too leafy to cut easily.

As mentioned earlier when the buyers started policies refusing to buy any burnt cane the farmers obliged and harvested it green, sold it green, then went back to the fields and burned them afterwards anyway. If these harvesters are not the type that till the stalks back into the earth I would imagine burning will continue just as badly as before and there are going to be a lot of red faces. People need to understand farmers burn because they enjoy it, not because they have to from corn to rice to sugar to you name it.

 

21 hours ago, canopy said:

It has already been observed that when the cane buyers put in policies that they would not purchase burnt cane, the Thai farmers harvested their green cane, sold it, THEN BURNT THE FIELDS AS USUAL. In light of this, how are harvesting machines going to help reduce smog?

 

You can't stop Thai people from burning waste. 

 

I've tried. 

 

It's like a reflex; they see something left over that's flammable, out comes a lighter and it's on fire before anyone knows what happened, be it piles of leaves (with bits of plastic mixed in of course), grass/other plants in fields, or rubbish in residential areas.

 

My prediction: they'll spend the 6 billion baht on these machines, some farmers will use them, some won't, and next year about this time we'll have the exact same problem with smog.  No matter the harvest method, there will still be waste left over and some idiot will set fire to it.

Very Sweet deal indeed,for some.????