An Intercomparison of Regional Atmospheric Circulation and the Melt Season Loss of Arctic Snow Cover and Sea Ice Extent Across the Land-Ocean Boundary

This study is designed to compare the monthly continental snow cover and sea ice extent loss in the Arctic with regional atmospheric conditions including: mean sea level pressure, 925 hPa air temperature, and mean wind direction among others during the melt season (March-August) over the 29-year study period 1979-2007. Little research has gone into studying the concurrent variations in the annual loss of continental snow cover and sea ice extent across the land-ocean boundary, since these data are largely stored in incompatible formats. However, the analysis of these data, averaged spatially over three autonomous study regions located in Siberia, North America, and Western Russia, reveals a distinct difference in the response of snow and sea ice to the atmospheric forcing. On average, sea ice extent is lost earlier in the year, in May, than snow cover, in June, although Arctic sea ice is located farther north than continental snow in all three study regions. Once the loss of snow and ice extent begins, snow cover is completely removed sooner than sea ice extent, even though ice loss begins earlier in the melt season. Further, the analysis of the atmospheric conditions surrounding loss of snow and ice cover over the independent study regions indicates that conditions of cool temperatures with strong northeasterly winds in the later melt season months are effective at removing sea ice cover, likely through ice divergence, as are warmer temperatures via southerly winds directly forcing melt. The results of this study set the framework for further analysis of the direct influence of snow cover loss on later melt season sea ice extents and the predictability of snow and sea ice extent responses to modeled future climate conditions

RP92-217 #2 Producer Marketing Mangement: Deferred Pricing Alternatives for Grain

Grain producers must make marketing decisions every day. First they must decide whether to price or hold grain. If they decide to price grain, they must then choose the most appropriate method of pricing: cash sale, forward contract, or hedging. If they decide to hold grain (not to price), they must choose the most appropriate method of retaining ownership. This fact sheet presents some guidelines to help producers choose the least costly method of owning grain or speculating on price level changes.

RP92-217 No. 19 Cost of Grain Storage

Grain marketing decisions are among the toughest the farm owner/operator or manager must make. Grain producers store grain to speculate on receiving higher prices, earn a return above storage costs, or to take advantage of government programs. Prices must increase enough to cover the additional costs, or forward contract prices must exceed current prices by more than the cost of storage in order to justify forward pricing. The gain in prices received can come from both changes in price level and changes in basis. This research publication discusses all the areas of the cost of grain storage.

Grain Storage Costs and Rental Rates

Trends in Grain Storage - Commercial grain storage eliminates the need to monitor grain conditions and, hence, offers the peace of mind that unsold grain will remain in condition. There may be a cost trade-off between this reduced storage risk and the cost of on-farm storage.