- Agriculture.com Community
- Announcements & Forum Help
- Farm Business
- Young & Beginning Farmers
- Cattle Talk
- Crop Talk
- Hog Talk
- Ask the Agronomy Insider
- Machinery Talk
- Machinery Marketplace
- Shops, buildings and bins
- Ask the SF Engineman!
- Computers & more
- Precision Agriculture
- People & Rural Life
- Ag Forum
- Women In Ag
- Agriculture.com Blogs
- Your Farm in the Future
- Women in Ag: Lisa Foust Prater
- Women in Ag: Brenda Frketich
- Women in Ag: Anne Miller
- Women in Ag: Jennifer Dewey
- Women in Ag: Talkin' Turkey with Lara Durben
- Women in Ag: Heather Lifsey Barnes
09-26-2013 02:12 PM - edited 09-26-2013 02:33 PM
The Federation of Associations of Mato Grosso do Sul (center-western state of Brazil) Farmers announced today that they are considering to use the port of Iquique, in the country of Chile. According to Rui Falcão, president of the federation, the Brazilian ports are not sufficient for the Brazilian demand and there is a growing grain production. Chilean ports are considered the most efficient in South America. However, there is over 1,000 miles to get from Campo Grande (Mato Grosso do Sul) to Iquique (Chile). That would be by truck driving (my guess here) and through the Andes.
What are your thoughts on that guys?
09-26-2013 02:31 PM
That was my question too. Luis says the worst part of the whole trek would be driving through Bolivia. Apparently, that country has the worst roads in South America. I've been on the northern part of Br-163 in Mato Grosso. It's hard to believe anything is worse than that stretch of road.
So, let me get this straight. Brazil can't even finish building much-needed railroads, yet their going to start climbing mountains to get the crop to sea? It sounds awfully ambitious.
09-26-2013 02:39 PM
I'm guessing Bolivia, Paraguay, and Chile are going to have just a little say in it as their roads will be the ones worn out with all that truck traffic. 2 or three border crossings in SA will be worse for the truckers than the potholes at home.
09-26-2013 04:41 PM
I think a railroad is needed. That would be the long term solution regardless of which way it goes. 1000 miles of truck transport is not efficient enough for low priced commodities. The other long term solution is to convert commodities to higher value processed near where grown. Probably including meat. But still, a railroad would be the best.
There must be engineering issues that i don't understand that complicate the building of more rail in Brazil. That is the single difference between US expansion in the west and Brazilian expansion as far as exploiting commerce.
09-26-2013 06:30 PM
I have a neighbor who works with an engineering firm in oil & gas industry - they are doing some pretty large infrastructure jobs in Brasil....he's having to spend quite a bit of time down there.
he basically says they are "so antiquated w/ just about everything structurally," it's hard for us to fathom.
looks like quite a few switchbacks through the mountains on this route, luis - hauling grain??? hit a little black ice - u gotta be kidding.
YES, rail would be the only SANE possibility......if they are serious - pony it up, contract w/ one of the big companies (who build or help re-build countries) -- get her done.
09-26-2013 07:01 PM
Have none of you ever watched Ice Road Truckers on the History Channel? They sent Lisa, Rick, and Alex to Bolivia. Alex came home after like two episodes. I can't believe the market is trying to get us to buy this BS.
09-27-2013 03:51 AM
WAHT gets me is the HEADLINEs hit wkly, Brazil or Agretina unable to
export, LOGISTICS, people need it to eat for them selves, or X nation needs to impirt some this yr
-- see Palouser Argentina --
and perma bulls love it, buut scale, perspective, Brazil exporyt a LOT of beans yr in yr out,
if this yr, XYZ port problwm or limitation are bottlenecking export,
to what degree vs the crop and as important, for how long.
19/20 becomes non issue.