DOCSLIB.ORG

Annual Energy Outlook 2020 with Projections to 2050

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Annual Energy Outlook 2020 with Projections to 2050 Annual Energy Outlook 2020 with projections to 2050 January 29, 2020 #AEO2020 www.eia.gov/aeo Annual Energy Outlook 2020 with projections to 2050 January 2020 U.S. Energy Information Administration Office of Energy Analysis U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 This publication is on the Web at: https://www.eia.gov/aeo This report was prepared by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), the statistical and analytical agency within the U.S. Department of Energy. By law, EIA's data, analyses, and forecasts are independent of approval by any other officer or employee of the United States Government. The views in this report therefore should not be construed as representing those of the Department of Energy or other federal agencies. U.S. EnergyU.S. Information Energy Information Administration Administration #AEO2020 www.eia.gov/aeo2 Key Takeaways from U.S. Energy Information Administration’s Annual Energy Outlook 2020 • In the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s (EIA) Annual Energy Outlook 2020 (AEO2020) Reference case, U.S. energy consumption grows more slowly than gross domestic product throughout the projection period (2050) as U.S. energy efficiency continues to increase. This decline in the energy intensity of the U.S. economy continues through 2050. • The electricity generation mix continues to experience a rapid rate of change, with renewables the fastest-growing source of electricity generation through 2050 because of continuing declines in the capital costs for solar and wind that are supported by federal tax credits and higher state-level renewables targets. With slow load growth and increasing electricity production from renewables, U.S. coal-fired and nuclear electricity generation declines; most of the decline occurs by the mid-2020s. • The United States continues to produce historically high levels of crude oil and natural gas. Slow growth in domestic consumption of these fuels leads to increasing exports of crude oil, petroleum products, and liquefied natural gas. • After falling during the first half of the projection period, total U.S. energy-related carbon dioxide emissions resume modest growth in the 2030s, driven largely by increases in energy demand in the transportation and industrial sectors; however, by 2050, they remain 4% lower than 2019 levels. U.S. EnergyU.S. Information Energy Information Administration Administration #AEO2020 www.eia.gov/aeo 3 The Annual Energy Outlook explores long-term energy trends in the United States • The value of the projections in the AEO2020 is not that they are predictions of what will happen, but rather, they are modeled projections of what may happen given certain assumptions and methodologies. By varying those assumptions and methodologies, AEO2020 can illustrate important factors in future energy production and use in the United States. • Energy market projections are subject to much uncertainty because many of the events that shape energy markets—as well as future developments in technologies, demographics, and resources—cannot be foreseen with certainty. To illustrate the importance of key assumptions, AEO2020 includes a Reference case and side cases that systematically vary important underlying assumptions. • EIA develops the AEO with the National Energy Modeling System (NEMS), an integrated model that captures interactions of economic changes and energy supply, demand, and prices. • More information about the assumptions EIA used to develop these projections will be available on the AEO website shortly after the release of the AEO2020. • The AEO is published to satisfy the Department of Energy Organization Act of 1977, which requires the Administrator of the U.S. Energy Information Administration to prepare annual reports on trends and projections for energy use and supply. U.S. EnergyU.S. Information Energy Information Administration Administration #AEO2020 www.eia.gov/aeo 3 What is the AEO2020 Reference case? • The AEO2020 Reference case represents EIA’s best assessment of how U.S. and world energy markets will operate through 2050, based on key assumptions intended to provide a base for exploring long-term trends. • The AEO2020 Reference case should be interpreted as a reasonable baseline case that can be compared with the cases that include alternative assumptions. • EIA based the economic and demographic trends reflected in the Reference case on the current views of leading economic forecasters and demographers. For example, the Reference case projection assumes improvement in known energy production, delivery, and consumption technologies. • The Reference case generally assumes that current laws and regulations that affect the energy sector, including laws that have end dates, are unchanged throughout the projection period. This assumption makes it possible for us to use the Reference case as a benchmark to compare policy-based modeling. • The potential effects of proposed legislation, regulations, or standards are not included in the AEO2020 cases. U.S. EnergyU.S. Information Energy Information Administration Administration #AEO2020 www.eia.gov/aeo 4 What are the side cases? • Oil prices in the future will be driven by global market balances that are primarily influenced by factors that are not modeled in NEMS. In the AEO2020 High Oil Price case, the price of Brent crude oil, in 2019 dollars, reaches $183 per barrel (b) by 2050, compared with $105/b in the Reference case and $46/b in the Low Oil Price case. • Compared with the Reference case, the High Oil and Gas Supply case reflects lower costs and greater U.S. oil and natural gas resource availability, which allows more production at lower prices. The Low Oil and Gas Supply case assumes fewer resources and higher costs. • The effects of economic assumptions on the energy consumption modeled in the AEO2020 are addressed in the High Economic Growth and Low Economic Growth cases, which assume compound annual growth rates for U.S. gross domestic product of 2.4% and 1.4%, respectively, from 2019 to 2050, compared with 1.9% per year growth in the Reference case. • AEO2020 introduces two cases to examine the sensitivities surrounding capital costs for electric power generating technologies. Capital cost reduction for an electric power generating technology is assumed to occur from learning by doing. In the High Renewables Cost case, no cost reduction from learning is assumed for any renewable technologies. The Low Renewables Cost case assumes higher learning for renewable technologies through 2050, resulting in a cost reduction of about 40% from the Reference case by 2050. U.S. EnergyU.S. Information Energy Information Administration Administration #AEO2020 www.eia.gov/aeo 6 Table of contents slide number Overview of energy markets 9 Critical drivers and model updates 15 Petroleum and other liquids 23 Natural gas 43 Electricity 61 Transportation 93 Buildings 109 Industrial 129 Emissions 143 References 157 U.S. EnergyU.S. Information Energy Information Administration Administration #AEO2020 www.eia.gov/aeo7 8 Overview of energy markets In the Reference case, strong domestic energy production coupled with slow growth in domestic energy demand leads the United States to remain a net energy exporter through 2050. Energy-related carbon dioxide emissions, driven by changes in the electricity generation fuel mix and increasing activity in the transportation and industrial sectors, experience modest growth in the later part of the projection period after falling in the 2020s. U.S. EnergyU.S. Information Energy Information Administration Administration #AEO2020 www.eia.gov/aeo 9 U.S. energy production grows significantly, but consumption grows moderately under the AEO2020 Reference case assumption of current laws and regulations Energy production (AEO2020 Reference case) Energy consumption by sector (AEO2020 Reference case) quadrillion British thermal units quadrillion British thermal units 2019 2019 50 50 history projections history projections dry natural gas 45 45 electric power 40 40 35 35 industrial 30 30 25 crude oil and lease 25 condensate transportation 20 other renewable energy20 15 15 coal residential 10 natural gas plant 10 commercial liquids 5 nuclear 5 hydro 0 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 U.S. EnergyU.S. Information Energy Information Administration Administration #AEO2020 www.eia.gov/aeo 10 The United States becomes a net energy exporter on an annual basis by 2020 in the AEO2020 Reference case— Gross energy trade (AEO2020 Reference case) Net energy imports (AEO2020 Reference case) quadrillion British thermal units quadrillion British thermal units 2019 40 2019 history projections 30 history projections exports 35 25 30 20 imports 25 15 20 10 petroleum and other liquids 15 net imports 5 electricity coal and coke 10 0 natural gas 5 -5 net exports 0 -10 1990 2010 2030 2050 1990 2010 2030 2050 U.S. EnergyU.S. Information Energy Information Administration Administration #AEO2020 www.eia.gov/aeo 11 —but the United States continues to import and export energy throughout the projection period • The United States imported more energy than it exported annually since 1953, but continued growth in petroleum and natural gas exports results in the United States becoming a net energy exporter in 2020 in all AEO2020 cases. • In the AEO2020 Reference case, the United States exports more petroleum and other liquids than it imports annually starting in 2020 as U.S. crude oil production continues to increase and domestic consumption of petroleum products decreases. Near the end of the projection period, the United States returns to importing more petroleum and other liquids than it exports on an energy basis as a result of increasing domestic gasoline consumption and falling domestic crude oil production after 2047. • The United States became a net natural gas exporter on an annual basis in 2017 and continued to export more natural gas than it imported in 2018 and in 2019. In the AEO2020 Reference case, liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports to more distant destinations will increasingly dominate the U.S. natural gas trade, and the United States is projected to remain a net natural gas exporter through 2050.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Economics of Competition in the U.S. Livestock Industry Clement E. Ward
    Economics of Competition in the U.S. Livestock Industry Clement E. Ward, Professor Emeritus Department of Agricultural Economics Oklahoma State University January 2010 Paper Background and Objectives Questions of market structure changes, their causes, and impacts for pricing and competition have been focus areas for the author over his entire 35-year career (1974-2009). Pricing and competition are highly emotional issues to many and focusing on factual, objective economic analyses is critical. This paper is the author’s contribution to that effort. The objectives of this paper are to: (1) put meatpacking competition issues in historical perspective, (2) highlight market structure changes in meatpacking, (3) note some key lawsuits and court rulings that contribute to the historical perspective and regulatory environment, and (4) summarize the body of research related to concentration and competition issues. These were the same objectives I stated in a presentation made at a conference in December 2009, The Economics of Structural Change and Competition in the Food System, sponsored by the Farm Foundation and other professional agricultural economics organizations. The basis for my conference presentation and this paper is an article I published, “A Review of Causes for and Consequences of Economic Concentration in the U.S. Meatpacking Industry,” in an online journal, Current Agriculture, Food & Resource Issues in 2002, http://caes.usask.ca/cafri/search/archive/2002-ward3-1.pdf. This paper is an updated, modified version of the review article though the author cannot claim it is an exhaustive, comprehensive review of the relevant literature. Issue Background Nearly 20 years ago, the author ran across a statement which provides a perspective for the issues of concentration, consolidation, pricing, and competition in meatpacking.
    [Show full text]
  • Auto Retailing: Why the Franchise System Works Best
    AUTO RETAILING: WHY THE FRANCHISE SYSTEM WORKS BEST Q Executive Summary or manufacturers and consumers alike, the automotive and communities—were much more highly motivated and franchise system is the best method for distributing and successful retailers than factory employees or contractors. F selling new cars and trucks. For consumers, new-car That’s still true today, as evidenced by some key findings franchises create intra-brand competition that lowers prices; of this study: generate extra accountability for consumers in warranty and • Today, the average dealership requires an investment of safety recall situations; and provide enormous local eco- $11.3 million, including physical facilities, land, inventory nomic benefits, from well-paying jobs to billions in local taxes. and working capital. For manufacturers, the franchise system is simply the • Nationwide, dealers have invested nearly $200 billion in most efficient and effective way to distribute and sell automo- dealership facilities. biles nationwide. Franchised dealers invest millions of dollars Annual operating costs totaled $81.5 billion in 2013, of private capital in their retail outlets to provide top sales and • an average of $4.6 million per dealership. These service experiences, allowing auto manufacturers to concen- costs include personnel, utilities, advertising and trate their capital in their core areas: designing, building and regulatory compliance. marketing vehicles. Throughout the history of the auto industry, manufactur- • The vast majority—95.6 percent—of the 17,663 ers have experimented with selling directly to consumers. In individual franchised retail automotive outlets are locally fact, in the early years of the industry, manufacturers used and privately owned.
    [Show full text]
  • Digitalisation and Intermediaries in the Music Industry
    CREATe Working Paper 2017/07 (June 2017) Digitalisation and intermediaries in the Music Industry Authors Morten Hviid Sabine Jacques Sofia Izquierdo Sanchez Centre for Competition Policy, Centre for Competition Policy, Department of Accountancy, Finance, University of East Anglia University of East Anglia and Economics, University of Huddersfield [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] CREATe Working Paper Series DOI:10.5281/zenodo.809949 This release was supported by the RCUK funded Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy (CREATe), AHRC Grant Number AH/K000179/1. Abstract Prior to digitalisation, the vertical structure of the market for recorded music could be described as a large number of artists [composers, lyricists and musicians] supplying creative expressions to a small number of larger record labels and publishers who funded, produced, and marketed the resulting recorded music to subsequently sell these works to consumers through a fragmented retail sector. We argue that digitalisation has led to a new structure in which the retail segment has also become concentrated. Such a structure, with successive oligopolistic segments, can lead to higher consumer prices through double marginalisation. We further question whether a combination of disintermediation of the record labels function combined with “self- publishing” by artists, will lead to the demise of powerful firms in the record label segment, thus shifting market power from the record label and publisher segment to the retail segment, rather than increasing the number of segments with market power. i Table of Contents 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1 2. How the advancement of technologies shapes the music industry .................................
    [Show full text]
  • Economic Energy Efficiency of Food Production Systems
    energies Article Economic Energy Efficiency of Food Production Systems Bartłomiej Bajan * , Aldona Mrówczy ´nska-Kami´nska and Walenty Poczta Department of Economics and Economic Policy in Agribusiness, Faculty of Economics, Poznan University of Life Sciences, 60-637 Pozna´n,Poland; [email protected] (A.M.-K.); [email protected] (W.P.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +48-61-846-6379 Received: 19 September 2020; Accepted: 6 November 2020; Published: 8 November 2020 Abstract: The current global population growth forecast carries with it a global increase in demand for food. In order to meet this demand, it is necessary to increase production, which requires an increase in energy consumption. However, forecasted energy production growth is insufficient and traditional sources of energy are limited; hence, it is necessary to strive for greater energy efficiency in food production systems. The study aimed to compare the economic energy efficiency of food production systems in selected countries and identify the sources of diversification in this field. As a measure of energy efficiency, the indicators of the energy intensity of food production were used in this study. To calculate these indicators, a method based on input-output life-cycle assessment assumptions was used, which enables researchers to obtain fully comparable results between countries. The study showed that despite an increase in energy consumption in the food production systems of the analyzed countries by an average of 27%, from 19.3 EJ to 24.5 EJ, from 2000 to 2014, their energy intensity decreased, on average, by more than 18%, from 8.5 MJ/USD to 6.9 MJ/USD.
    [Show full text]
  • May 23, 2019 Dear Food Industry, Food Waste Is a Major Concern In
    May 23, 2019 Dear Food Industry, Food waste is a major concern in the United States. The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) Economic Research Service estimates that 30 percent of food is lost or wasted at the retail and consumer level.1 This means Americans are throwing out approximately 133 billion pounds of food worth $161 billion each year.2 Manufacturers of packaged foods voluntarily use a wide variety of introductory phrases on product date labels, such as “Best If Used By,” “Use By,” and “Sell By,” to describe quality dates to indicate when a food may be at its best quality. In a 2007 survey of U.S. consumers conducted on knowledge and use of open dates (i.e. calendar dates) used on product date labels for common packaged foods, less than half were able to distinguish between the meanings of three different introductory phrases that often appear before the calendar date on the product label: “Sell By”, “Use By”, and “Best If Used By”.3 The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) has found that food waste by consumers may often result from fears about food safety caused by misunderstanding what the introductory phrases on product date labels mean, along with uncertainty about storage of perishable foods.4 It has been estimated that confusion over date labeling accounts for approximately 20 percent of consumer food waste.5 Industry, government, and non-profit organizations have been working to reduce consumer confusion regarding product date labels. Consumer research has found that the “Best If Used By” introductory phrase communicates to consumers the date by with the product will be of optimal quality.1 FDA has engaged in consumer education to raise awareness of food waste, reduce confusion regarding voluntary quality-based date labeling, and provide advice on food storage best practices to reduce waste.
    [Show full text]
  • Food & Beverage Processing Industry Operating Costs
    COMPARATIVE FOOD & BEVERAGE PROCESSING INDUSTRY OPERATING COSTS The Boyd Company, Inc. Location Consultants Princeton, NJ A COMPARATIVE OPERATING FOOD & BEVERAGE PROCESSING COST ANALYSIS INDUSTRY SITE SELECTION TABLE OF CONTENTS COMPARATIVE OPERATING COST ANALYSIS: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND NOTES ...................................................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1 COMPARATIVE REGIONAL LOCATIONS ........................................................................... 1 LABOR COSTS ..................................................................................................................... 2 COMPARATIVE ELECTRIC POWER AND NATURAL GAS COSTS .................................. 2 COMPARATIVE LAND ACQUISITION AND CONSTRUCTION COSTS ............................. 3 COMPARATIVE AD VALOREM AND SALES TAX COSTS ................................................. 3 TOTAL ANNUAL OPERATING COST RANKINGS .............................................................. 3 ABOUT BOYD ....................................................................................................................... 4 COMPARATIVE OPERATING COST ANALYSIS : ........................................................................ 5 EXHIBIT I: A COMPARATIVE ANNUAL OPERATING COST SIMULATION SUMMARY .................................................................................................. 6-7 EXHIBIT
    [Show full text]
  • ALIPHATIC DICARBOXYLIC ACIDS from OIL SHALE ORGANIC MATTER – HISTORIC REVIEW REIN VESKI(A)
    Oil Shale, 2019, Vol. 36, No. 1, pp. 76–95 ISSN 0208-189X doi: https://doi.org/10.3176/oil.2019.1.06 © 2019 Estonian Academy Publishers ALIPHATIC DICARBOXYLIC ACIDS FROM OIL SHALE ORGANIC MATTER ‒ HISTORIC REVIEW REIN VESKI(a)*, SIIM VESKI(b) (a) Peat Info Ltd, Sõpruse pst 233–48, 13420 Tallinn, Estonia (b) Department of Geology, Tallinn University of Technology, Ehitajate tee 5, 19086 Tallinn, Estonia Abstract. This paper gives a historic overview of the innovation activities in the former Soviet Union, including the Estonian SSR, in the direct chemical processing of organic matter concentrates of Estonian oil shale kukersite (kukersite) as well as other sapropelites. The overview sheds light on the laboratory experiments started in the 1950s and subsequent extensive, triple- shift work on a pilot scale on nitric acid, to produce individual dicarboxylic acids from succinic to sebacic acids, their dimethyl esters or mixtures in the 1980s. Keywords: dicarboxylic acids, nitric acid oxidation, plant growth stimulator, Estonian oil shale kukersite, Krasava oil shale, Budagovo sapropelite. 1. Introduction According to the National Development Plan for the Use of Oil Shale 2016– 2030 [1], the oil shale industry in Estonia will consume 28 or 9.1 million tons of oil shale in the years to come in a “rational manner”, which in today’s context means the production of power, oil and gas. This article discusses the reasonability to produce aliphatic dicarboxylic acids and plant growth stimulators from oil shale organic matter concentrates. The technology to produce said acids and plant growth stimulators was developed by Estonian researchers in the early 1950s, bearing in mind the economic interests and situation of the Soviet Union.
    [Show full text]
  • 20200930 – Prop 12 9Th Circuit Amicus Business Groups
    Case: 20-55631, 09/30/2020, ID: 11841979, DktEntry: 21, Page 1 of 40 No. 20-55631 IN THE United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit NATIONAL PORK PRODUCERS COUNCIL & AMERICAN FARM BUREAU FEDERATION, Plaintiff-Appellants, v. KAREN ROSS, et al., Defendant-Appellees, and THE HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE UNITED STATES, et al., Intervenor-Defendant-Appellees. On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California No. 3:19-cv-02324-W-AHG, District Judge Thomas J. Whelan BRIEF FOR THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MANUFACTURERS, THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, FMI – THE FOOD INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION, THE NATIONAL CATTLEMEN’S BEEF ASSOCIATION, AND THE NATIONAL MINING ASSOCIATION AS AMICI CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF APPELLANT Patrick Hedren Catherine E. Stetson Erica Klenicki Danielle Desaulniers Stempel MANUFACTURERS’ CENTER HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP FOR LEGAL ACTION 555 Thirteenth Street NW 733 10th Street NW Washington, DC 20004 Washington, DC 20001 Phone: (202) 637-5600 Phone: (202) 637-3000 Fax: (202) 637-5910 Counsel for National Association [email protected] of Manufacturers Counsel for Amici Curiae September 30, 2020 Additional Counsel Listed on Inside Cover Case: 20-55631, 09/30/2020, ID: 11841979, DktEntry: 21, Page 2 of 40 Additional counsel: Steven P. Lehotsky Jonathan D. Urick U.S. CHAMBER LITIGATION CENTER 1615 H Street NW Washington, DC 20062 Phone: (202) 463-5948 Counsel for Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America Stephanie K. Harris FMI – THE FOOD INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION
    [Show full text]
  • Food and Pharma Basics Basics Basics Food & Pharma Food & Pharma
    WISSEN - KNOWLEDGE Food and Pharma Basics BASICS BASICS Food & Pharma Food & Pharma Food and Pharma Hygienic Design Cleanability © RECHNER Germany 04/2020 EN - Printed in EU, all rights reserved. 2 RECHNER Industrie-Elektronik GmbH • Gaußstraße 6-10 • D-68623 Lampertheim • Tel. +49 6206 5007-0 • Fax +49 6206 5007-36 • e-mail: [email protected] • www.rechner-sensors.com All specifications are subject to change without notice. (04/2020) BASICS BASICS Food & Pharma Food & Pharma TABLE OF CONTEND Table of Contend Page Motivation 4 - 5 Sources of Information 6 European Standards and Directives 7 - 8 Declaration of Conformity Norms and DirectivesNorms Basics and Examples 9 - 14 Tri-Clamp / Tri-Clover 15 - 22 Tri-Clamp Food Contact Materials Basics and Directives 23 - 25 Materials Plastics 26 Metalls 27 RECHNER Industrie-Elektronik GmbH • Gaußstraße 6-10 • D-68623 Lampertheim • Tel. +49 6206 5007-0 • Fax +49 6206 5007-36 • e-mail: [email protected] • www.rechner-sensors.com 3 All specifications are subject to change without notice.(04/2020) BASICS BASICS Food & Pharma Food & Pharma MOTIVATION SAFE PRODUCts In process technology and plant engineering, the definition of „hygienic design“ refers to the design of machines and plants with consideration of the cleanability of the system. CONSUMER PROTECTION This is always relevant where products are manufactured that can be dangerous for the consumer due to germs or contamination and also where the product can turn out to be unusable, which represents a loss for the manufacturer. OPTIMIZatiON OF THE CLEANING PROCESSES Hygienic design is for example relevant in the following business areas: • Food industry (humans and animals) REDUCTION OF THE • Beverage industry CLEANING AND • Pharmaceutical industry • chemical industry MAINENANCE TIMES • cosmetic industry • Biotechnology Hygienic design must be considered at all parts of the plant that come into direct contact with the product to be produced.
    [Show full text]
  • Value Growth and the Music Industry: the Untold Story of Digital Success by Maud Sacquet October 2017
    RESEARCH PAPER Value Growth and the Music Industry: The Untold Story of Digital Success By Maud Sacquet October 2017 Executive Summary societies’ collections increased 26% globally between 2007 and 2015. Meanwhile, European consumers and For music listeners, digitisation and the internet tell a businesses are the highest contributors globally to story of increased consumer welfare1. Today, consumers collecting societies’ revenues. have access to a greater choice of music than ever before and can listen to music anywhere, anytime, on a broad range of devices. And with all these increased These figures undermine the case for an alleged “value choices has come an explosion of sharing and creativity. gap”, showing instead healthy rises in revenue. These figures demonstrate that digital’s efficiency savings are From the creative industry side, the internet has also passed on to both consumers and record labels — and enabled new business models for creators and the hence that digital streaming services enable massive emergence of new artists and music intermediaries. It value growth. has also allowed independent labels to thrive — in Adele’s producer’s own words, digital music is a “more level playing field”2. The supply side of music is more Introduction diverse and competitive than ever. The current debate in the European Union on copyright Have these gains been achieved at the expense of reform is in part focused on an alleged “value gap”, legacy music players, such as major labels and defined in May 2016 by the International Federation collecting societies? of the Phonographic Industry (“IFPI”) as “the dramatic contrast between the proportionate revenues In this paper, we look at data from major record labels generated by user upload services and by paid and from collecting societies to answer this question.
    [Show full text]
  • The New U.S. Meat Industry
    Barkema/Drabenstott.qxd 6/21/01 1:37 PM Page 33 The New U.S. Meat Industry By Alan Barkema, Mark Drabenstott, and Nancy Novack new meat industry is rapidly emerging in the United States, as food retailers, meat processors, and farms and ranches coalesce Ainto fewer and larger businesses. The industry’s rapid consolida- tion in recent years has triggered alarms that the industry’s new giants in retailing and processing could drive up food prices for consumers and drive down livestock prices for producers. How should public policy respond to the industry’s consolidation? And how can all participants in the industry—producers, processors, retailers, and consumers—benefit from its new structure? This article studies the striking changes in the meat industry in three steps. First it describes how the industry is changing. Then it examines the forces driving the industry’s consolidation. Finally, it con- siders how consumers and industry participants are affected. While cur- rent evidence is scant that market power has hurt either consumers or producers, the industry’s rapid consolidation nevertheless warrants vigi- lance. At the same time, public policy might also play a role in ensuring that all participants in the market benefit from its new structure. All three authors are members of the bank’s Center for the Study of Rural America. Alan Barkema is vice president and economist, Mark Drabenstott is vice president and director, and Nancy Novack is a research associate. Kate Sheaff, a research associate in the Center, helped prepare the article. The article is on the bank’s web site at www.kc.frb.org.
    [Show full text]
  • Food Microstructure - Aguilera, José M
    FOOD ENGINEERING – Vol. I - Food Microstructure - Aguilera, José M. FOOD MICROSTRUCTURE Aguilera, José M. Department of Chemical and Bioprocessing Engineering, Universidad Católica de Chile ,Chile Keywords: Microstructure, microscopy, freezing, extrusion, ice cream, margarine, image processing, food materials science. Contents 1. Introduction 2. Structure-Property Relationships in Foods 3. Examining Food Microstructure 3.1. Light Microscopy 3.2. Fluorescence Microscopy 3.3. Confocal Microscopy 3.4. Transmission and Scanning Electron Microscopy 3.5. Scanning Probe and Atomic Force Microscopy 3.6. X-ray Analysis 3.7. Immunolabeling Techniques 4. Food Preservation and Microstructure 4.1. Food Freezing 4.2. Ice Cream 4.3. Extrusion of Foods 4.4. Spreadable Fat Products 5. Perspectives Glossary Bibliography Biographical Sketch Summary Food microstructure recognizes that foods are highly structured and heterogeneous materials composed of architectural elements ranging from the submicron level to those seen with the naked eye. More important, the types of such structural units and their interactionsUNESCO are decisive in the perception – of EOLSSmany sensorial properties, the way that foods perform as engineering materials, and how they break down during storage and mastication. TheSAMPLE structure-property relationships CHAPTERS of foods describe the way in which physicochemical, functional, and technological properties of foods relate to their structure. This article revises different microscopy techniques used to characterize food microstructure from the conventional light microscope to advanced techniques such as electron, confocal laser scanning, and atomic force microscopy. Examples are presented on the role of microstructure in ice cream, frozen and extruded foods, and new fabricated products such as low-calorie spreads. Food microstructure is likely to play a ©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS) FOOD ENGINEERING – Vol.
    [Show full text]