Ohio State creates new Center for Subsurface Energy

In response to the growing need for an educational and research source for issues related to Ohio’s developing shale energy industry, The Ohio State University announced today the creation of the Ohio State Subsurface Energy Resource Center (SERC). The center, with faculty experts in the areas of economics, law and policy; earth science; engineering; energy and environmental science; extension and community development; and public health, will conduct relevant research and serve as a resource to subsurface energy stakeholders.

The center was established in response to recent technical advances that are leading to the expansion of horizontal drilling for hydrocarbon-bearing shale and other resources across Ohio. As one of the nation’s largest research universities and the state’s land-grant institution, Ohio State has a wealth of expertise to contribute to subsurface energy development and its associated environmental issues, as well as a responsibility to serve as a resource to policy makers.

“The creation of the Subsurface Energy Resource Center leverages the considerable expertise of Ohio State to provide a solid foundation for energy research and partnerships throughout Ohio,” said President E. Gordon Gee. “It draws upon a strong base of both excellence in environmental and energy research and commitment to partnering for Ohio’s future. Together, we can develop as a comprehensive resource for policymakers, companies, and citizens.”

SERC will ensure that Ohio State is a key participant in forums and decision making groups on energy and environmental issues related to subsurface development. Under the leadership of Ron Sega, vice president and enterprise executive for energy and the environment, SERC will work across Ohio State to help facilitate opportunities for Ohio State researchers and organized groups to work on major proposal development opportunities.

 “Ohio has an important opportunity to examine and research the potential for shale energy within our state and region,” said Sega. “Ohio State University is eager to add to the body of knowledge surrounding shale energy through the Subsurface Energy Resource, and our experts in subsurface geology and engineering, public policy, community affairs and public health will provide a valuable resource to the state as this issue develops.”

SERC will be led by co-directors Jeffrey Daniels, professor in the School of Earth Sciences, and Douglas Southgate, professor in Agricultural, Environmental and Development Economics. Daniels is a geophysicist with extensive exploration experience utilizing seismic, petrophysical measurements and borehole geophysics, and currently works to characterize reservoir and cap rock (shale) in Ohio for CO2 sequestration potential, a project that has implications for gas shale as well as CO2 storage. Southgate is an economist who specializes in natural resource development. He has studied petroleum development in South America and is currently contributing to an assessment of the impacts on Ohio’s economy of extracting fossil fuels from shale formations in the state.

A multidisciplinary coordinating committee comprised of faculty and staff experts in engineering and public health will provide additional oversight and strategic direction for the center. In order to promote technological improvement and address environmental and other issues related to energy resource development, the primary functions of SERC will be to:

• facilitate communication and collaboration between faculty educators and researchers within Ohio State

• provide a communication link among industry, government agencies, NGOs and universities throughout the state

• provide a forum to facilitate discussion of energy and environmental issues related to subsurface resource development

Shale development will be the near-term primary focus of SERC, but other energy resources will also be addressed as opportunities and needs arise. The existing Shale Energy Education Work Group formed by Ohio State Extension will continue its current operation and serve as the primary entity to coordinate public outreach and education. Ohio State Extension educators have conducted 39 shale energy related education programs to date, reaching 4,318 participants throughout Ohio.

Community Supported Agriculture Workshops Focused on Increasing Producer Profits

 By: Beth Fausey Scheckelhoff, Educator and Director, Agricultural Business Enhancement Center, OSU Extension

Since their introduction to the U.S. in 1984, numbers of community supported agriculture enterprises (CSAs) have grown to well over 160 operations in Ohio in 2011. Such enterprises connect well with consumers’ increasing interest in where food comes from, how it is grown, and how it is handled.  While still a relatively new model for value-added agricultural marketing, a CSA is an attractive marketing channel that enhances producer profits by providing working capital prior to the growing season, enabling farm diversification, and building relationships between communities and producers. Originally, CSAs’ member shareholders helped grow and harvest “their farm´s” crops. Today, CSAs have evolved to operate on a subscription basis, providing a given amount of product during an established growing season for a set fee. Subscribers or shareholders invest in the product and the risk associated with growing product over the course of the established season. More recently, innovative producers are developing CSAs in partnership with other producers, industry groups and organizations. This approach is a great attraction to existing producers looking to decrease risk, and to new producers looking for ways to lessen the costs and risks of start-up enterprises.

As more producers evaluate nontraditional methods of consumer marketing such as through a CSA, access to information on developing and sustaining a CSA operation is crucial. OSU Extension is assisting producers in evaluating, developing and sustaining CSA enterprises in Ohio by offering hands-on educational workshops, structured planning exercises, and supporting materials.  These workshops specifically addresses differences in markets, CSA models and how they can be effectively adapted and utilized, as well as what communication skills, consumer and producer agreements, and marketing strategies are necessary for success. Producers will gain valuable information from recent consumer research surveys, workshop materials, one-on-one consultations, online resources, fact sheets, and documented experiences of existing CSAs.

These workshops will be offered this fall.  Please visit this link for registration details: http://ohiogreenhouse.wordpress.com/

Wednesday, November 30, 2011                                      Thursday, December 1, 2011

6:00 to 9:00 pm                                                                            9:00 am to 12:00 pm

Miami County Extension Office                                                 Ohio State University 4-H Center

201 W. Main (in the Courthouse)                                              2201 Fred Taylor Drive, Gehres Room

Troy, OH  45373                                                                            Columbus, OH  43210


Wednesday, December 7, 2011                                        Thursday, December 8, 2011

6:00 to 9:00 pm                                                                            9:00 am to 12:00 pm

OSU Extension ABE Center                                                         Lorain County Extension Office

639 S. Dunbridge Rd., Suite 4                                                     42110 Russia Road

Bowling Green, OH 43402                                                          Elyria, OH 44035

Crop Input Outlook 2012

By: Barry Ward, Leader, Production Business Management, OSU Extension, Department of Agricultural, Environmental and Development Economics

 Crop profitability prospects for 2012 are positive for the three major row crops in Ohio. Input costs have increased from last year but high futures prices for 2012 crops allow producers to plan for positive margins for next year. OSU Extension Enterprise Budget projections show positive returns for corn, soybeans and wheat in 2012. These budgets are available online at: http://aede.osu.edu/programs/farmmanagement

OSU Extension Budgets show projected variable (cash) costs for corn, soybean, and wheat production to all be 10% higher in 2012 versus 2011.

Higher commodity prices and higher costs lead us to a riskier production year as the cash investment in an acre of corn will top $400 (excluding land, machinery and labor costs) and in some production scenarios be closer to $450 per acre. The cash investment in an acre of soybeans or wheat will be in the $200-$250 range.


The Energy Information Administration (EIA) estimates the average price for West Texas Intermediate Crude Oil at $88.00 per barrel for 2012 which is a 4.7% decrease from 2011. This is due to slightly lower oil consumption growth projections for 2012. The EIA projects natural gas prices to increase 4.3 percent in 2012. Expected tightness in the market is the reasoning, but this projection is harder to reconcile with the increased production capabilities in the U.S.


Fertilizer continues to be the most volatile of the crop input costs and cost management of this important input may be the difference in being a low cost or high cost producer in 2012. The different fertilizer products have seen significant price increases over last year and likely will continue to increase due to higher crop commodity prices and positive profitability prospects for 2012. Healthier farmer balance sheets and continued positive crop profit prospects have signaled the global marketplace to increase acreage (if possible) and maintain or increase fertilizer rates and led to strong global demand driven markets. On the flipside, the E.U. and U.S. sovereign debt issues and potential economic slowdowns are factors, if unresolved, may lead to a slowdown in fertilizer demand and flat to lower prices.

Nitrogen (N)

The retail price of N in October in Ohio was $900-950/ton for anhydrous ammonia (24% increase over year ago), $400-425/ton for UAN (28%) (32% increase over year ago), and $595-665/ton for urea (40% increase over year ago). Spring prepay NH3 is running $20-$25/ton more than spot delivered tons in many markets.

Nitrogen fertilizer manufacturers are presently operating at profitable levels due to higher N prices and relatively low natural gas prices, but this fact hasn’t led to supply outstripping demand as the entire supply chain has been more cautious in getting caught in a repeat of the 2008 upside-down fertilizer market.

With the high correlation of nitrogen price to corn price, future movements in nitrogen prices will more than likely take their cues from movements in price of corn.

Phosphorous (P2O5)

Di-ammonium Phosphate (DAP) in October in Ohio was $715-755/ton (18% increase over year ago) while mono-ammonium phosphate (MAP) was $715-775/ton (18% increase over year ago).

Phosphate rock, sulfur and anhydrous ammonia, all primary ingredients used in the manufacture of P fertilizers are presently high priced and have contributed to higher P fertilizer prices.

These higher ingredient prices along with strong world demand continue to pressure phosphorous fertilizer prices. These pressures signal continued higher prices for the 2012 crop production year.

Potassium (K20)

The retail price of potash in December in Ohio was $625-690/ton (38% increase from year ago).

The potash industry essentially operates as a duopoly (two firms, in this case, two consortiums, with dominant control of the market) with Canpotex (Canadian Potash Exporters) and Bellarussian Potash Co. controlling much of the global potash supply.

Potash prices will likely trend higher into 2012 as high crop prices will translate into continued strong demand while the two major potash consortiums will meter out supply to keep prices stable.

Seed and Crop Protection Chemicals

Company price data and industry sources indicate seed prices for 2012 to be 5-10% higher.

Crop protection chemical prices will see similar increases except glyphoste, which should continue to see relatively flat prices due to excess global production capacity.

Outlook information presented here was developed with data from AEDE research, the Energy Information Administration, USDA, other Land Grant research, futures markets and retail sector surveys. While gauged to the best of this author’s capabilities, forward looking statements contained in this document may prove to be incorrect due to changes in supply and demand and other political and economic related events.


Farmland Value and Rent Outlook 2012

By: Barry Ward, Leader, Production Business Management, OSU Extension, Department of Agricultural, Environmental and Development Economics

 No revelation! Cropland values in Ohio have increased in 2011. An OSU Extension survey conducted in December 2010 estimated that the increase in value of Ohio cropland in 2011 would be 5.3-6.0%. This was prior to sharp run ups in commodity prices. The Chicago Federal Reserve Bank and Purdue University both conducted surveys in July 2011 and found that cropland values in Indiana had appreciated 20-22% from one year ago. These increases in land value are due to a number of factors.

Crop profitability prospects were positive in 2011 as they have been for the most part since 2007. This period has seen some of the most profitable years in the last 50 years of crop production. These profit streams and healthier balance sheets have led many farmers to seek an investment option for these profits and many have turned to land. Investors outside of agriculture have also been looking to farmland as an investment alternative.

With many dollar’s and buyers chasing farmland, it isn’t a surprise to see land values increase substantially in 2011. Low interest rates and the relative scarcity of farmland being sold have also helped drive land values higher.

So all of this begs the question, “Where are land prices headed in 2012?” The case is strong for land values to see continued strength in 2012 as profitability prospects are good for this upcoming crop year.

Returns to Land (Gross Revenue minus all costs except land cost) are projected to be $190-$500/acre for Ohio Corn in 2012 depending on the land production capabilities. This is assuming current prices of inputs and December 2012 Futures prices less basis for corn. Using the same set of assumptions for Ohio soybeans, Returns to Land are projected to be $100-340/acre. Returns to Land for wheat in Ohio are projected to be $40-190/acre. These projections are based on OSU Extension Ohio Crop Enterprise Budgets available online at: http://aede.osu.edu/programs/farmmanagement/budgets

Producers and other investors outside of agriculture will continue to see farmland as a good investment alternative. With strong balance sheets many farmers will continue to be in the land buying mode.

The Income Method of Capitalization, an appraiser’s method of valuing assets, yields high land valuations based on 2012 projections for returns to land and interest rates. For example, using a $250/acre Return to Land and a 4% capitalization rate, farmland would be valued at $6250/acre. Higher Returns to Land and/or lower interest rates would yield higher “appraised” land values using this approach.

There should be a note of caution in deriving budgets and using the Income Method of Capitalization for valuing cropland for 2012 and beyond. Assumptions used to formulate these budgets and appraisals may change. Crop prices could fall and input costs may increase.

A few of the factors that could adversely affect crop profitability and land values in the next year include:

a)      E.U. and U.S. sovereign debt issues and potential economic slowdowns

b)      U.S. budget cuts leading to changes in farm policy and/or changes in energy policy (ethanol policy)

c)      Input price inflation

The December 2010 OSU Extension Survey of Cropland Values and Cash Rents found that cash rents were predicted to increase 8 to 9.5% in 2011. Cash rental rates will see continued upward pressure as higher commodity crop prices and good prospects for profit in 2012 drive competition in local markets. Producers that want to continue to operate on their existing rented land base will have to pay at or near the market rate for their area. See the “Western Ohio Cropland Values and Cash Rents 20120-11” Factsheet online at: http://ohioline.osu.edu/ae-fact/pdf/11-AED-911.pdf to see data on yields and cash rents for various land classes for your part of western Ohio.

Producers and landowners should also understand and attempt to quantify in some way the non-cash benefits provided by the producer to the landowner and vice-versa.

To manage risk of volatile crop and input markets, producers and landowner should consider flexible cash leases.

Outlook information presented here was developed with data from AEDE research, the Energy Information Administration, USDA, other Land Grant research, futures markets and retail sector surveys. While gauged to the best of this author’s capabilities, forward looking statements contained in this document may prove to be incorrect due to changes in supply and demand and other political and economic related events.

CHANGES TO THE AGRICULTURAL CHILD LABOR REGULATIONS: What it could mean when hiring young people on the farm

By: Dee Jepsen, Assistant Professor, Agricultural Safety Specialist

Recently the Department of Labor issued a proposed ruling to change the kinds of agricultural equipment and agricultural chores young people (under age 16) would be permitted to perform. Farm employers and agricultural businesses are encouraged to read more about the proposed changes and how these changes will affect youth working in agricultural settings.

To access the complete document, visit the US DOL website: http://webapps.dol.gov/FederalRegister/HtmlDisplay.aspx?DocId=25286&Month=9&Year=2011

These proposed changes will be the first update since 1970. They are designed to bring agricultural jobs in line with other guidelines required of employers in non-agricultural areas. NOTE: The proposed rules would continue to exempt children working on family farms.  A summary of the changes include:

1) Regulatory changes to the Child Labor Laws for Agriculture.

• Tractors operated by 14 and 15-year old youth be equipped with approved Roll-Over Protective Structures (ROPS) and seatbelts; and that seatbelt use be mandated.

• Prohibit the use of tractors of any horse power, including small garden-tractors; whereby the training exemption will either be removed or changed to 90 hours of study.

• Require that student learners operating tractors & farm machinery on public roads have a valid state driver’s license.

• Prohibit use of electronic devices, including communication devices, while operating tractors, power-driven equipment, and motor vehicles.

• Restrict use of all power-driven equipment (similar to that of non-agricultural industries).

• Prohibit minors from riding as passengers on all farm machines when on public roads, and all student learners riding as passengers must have an “approved seat and seatbelt” with a mandatory use seat belt policy.

• Prohibit employment in occupations involving operation of non-powered driven hoisting apparatus and conveyers; no student-learner exemption would be permitted.

• Prohibit certain occupations involving working with or around animals: includes handling animals with known dangerous behaviors; assisting in animal husbandry practices that inflict pain upon animal or result in unpredictable behavior (such as branding, breeding, dehorning, vaccinating, castrating, and treating sick/injured animals); poultry catching or cooping in preparation for market; working in a yard, pen, or stall of an intact (non-castrated) male animals or with female animals with suckling offspring or umbilical cords present; herding animals in confined spaces or on horseback, or using motorized vehicles such as trucks or all terrain vehicles.

• Prohibit the felling, bucking, skidding, loading, or unloading timber of any size; and prohibit the removal of stumps except by manual means

• Prevent the employment in construction, communications, wrecking, demolition, and excavation for youth 14-15 years of age.

• Prevent the employment while working on roofs, scaffolds, ladders, and elevations greater than 6 feet, including elevated farm structures like grain bins, silos, windmills, and towers, as well as elevated farm equipment and implements.

• Prohibit driving all motor vehicles and off-road vehicles by youth younger than 16.

• Prohibit work inside a fruit, forage, silo, grain bin, or manure pit.

• Consistent with EPA Worker Protection Standards for pesticides, ban all work that falls within the EPA classification of pesticide handler.

• Prohibit the employment of young workers in tobacco processes – includes planting, cultivating, topping, harvesting, baling, barning, and curing.

• A new non-agricultural regulation prohibiting the employment of youth in occupations containing farm-product raw materials and wholesale trade industries – includes work performed at country grain elevators, grain elevators, grain bins, silos, feed lots, feed yards, stockyards, livestock exchanges, and livestock auctions.

2) Changes to the training exemption – commonly known as the Tractor Certification Program – Eliminates training offered through Cooperative Extension programs. Recognizes programs taught through school-based agricultural education programs and their instructors. The proposal also seeks to increase training from 24 hours to 90 hours.

Like any new proposed changes, there is an opportunity for the public to comment. The time period to comment is open through the end of November. All comments, from multiple perspectives, are welcome – and especially from those who employ young workers, are educators of young workers, or are parents of young workers. The most beneficial remarks are those that are based on fact or true experiences. Emotional pleas or statements with broad generalizations are not as helpful as those that are written with clear objectives, provide explanatory observations, or give suggestions for consideration. 

 To comment on the ruling or read reviews of others, visit the Regulations.gov Website:


Labor industry professionals are working to improve the conditions of the work environment for young workers. In my role as the Extension Agricultural Safety Leader, I encourage readers to review the proposed changes and be familiar with these changes. When the implemented, they will change the employment flexibility that farmers and agricultural businesses have when hiring youth under age 16.

Move Over Brother; the Farmer’s Daughter is Coming Home to the Farm, Too!

By Julia Nolan Woodruff, former OSU Extension Educator

Transition planning is as important as ever, as we bring a new generation, including both sons and daughters, into the farm business. It was once a given that the son, no matter where they fell in the birth order, would be the one or ones who would carry on the family farming business. That’s not to say that in years gone by there weren’t instances that the daughter became the farmer, but it certainly was more the norm that the son was presented with the opportunity. Today, that is becoming less and less the case as more daughters are stepping into farming roles that require more than just looking the part of the farmer’s daughter we hear about in country songs.

Farming has seen many changes and advancements in technology that has allowed and even encouraged more daughters to think about returning to a business that was once thought of as a ‘man’s business.’ Technology has changed some of the physical aspects of the job, creating a chance for women who may not possess the same physical stature of men to be able to do the job just as well. There is also a strong business management side of farming that has been a very good fit for many women. Women have filled the role of bookkeeper and bill payer for many years, and are now branching out to include other management roles such as; marketing, accounting, tax planning, human resource management, etc. As farms become larger businesses, women have filled some of these very specialized roles on their family farms.

As daughters and sons begin to think about joining the family business, it’s important for transition planning to happen. One of the most important pieces is defining the roles each person will be assuming. These roles may be new positions on the farm or may be roles left behind by someone who has retired. Either way, written position descriptions can be a very helpful tool for all to understand what the expectations and responsibilities of each position are.

Along with defining roles, matching the right person with the right job will help lead you to success. Everyone brings different skills and strengths to the farm. Determining where those skill sets will give the most benefit to the farm can help with bottom line profitability as well as career satisfaction for all generations involved. Just because a daughter returns to the farm does not mean she has the skill set or desire to handle the accounting and record keeping responsibilities. She may be better suited to work with the animals or crop production. It’s important to take time to assess skills and not just assign jobs based on gender.

Understanding how decisions will be made is another important discussion to have as transitions begin to happen within a farm business. The new generation, no matter whether they are male or female, will be coming in with new and exciting ideas and technologies they want to try. Communication within the family business will be crucial. The senior generation will need to be willing to listen and sort out pro’s and con’s of new ideas and the junior generation will need to have the explanations and well thought out plans to go along with their ideas. Both generations will need to have patience and an open mind and be ready to compromise in order to keep this farm business moving in a positive direction.

I will take the opportunity one more time to say, no matter how strong a business plan and production record a family farm has, communication amongst family members and non-family employees is a critical factor in the farm’s success. It affects every aspect of the farm from production to safety to marketing to purchasing to transitioning, but most importantly it affects the family relations mixed up in this wonderful business of farming!

For those farmer’s daughters and other women farmers that want to learn more about risk management for farm businesses, there will be a series of workshops offered across the state this winter. Annie’s Project is a six week crash course in risk management covering the five areas of risk, marketing, production, financial, legal and human resources. This workshop will be held in Pickaway, Holmes, Clermont, Portage and Perry Counties.

Farm Finance for Women is a workshop based solely on the topic of financial risk management. It is a four week workshop that focuses on topics such as balance sheets, income statements, financial ratios and the Quicken Software used for record keeping. This workshop will be offered in Ashtabula, Wood, and Stark Counties.

Continue to read the Ohio Ag Manager for more information as it becomes available for these workshops. Additional workshops may be added as well. If you have interest in attending on of these workshops, please contact the OSU Extension office listed or your local office. For more information about the workshops visit:  http://www.extension.iastate.edu/annie/index.html


Ohio will withdraw dairy labeling rule

ODA agrees to rescind rule that prohibits “hormone free” claims on dairy products

The Ohio Department of Agriculture (ODA) has agreed to withdraw the controversial dairy labeling rule that restricts the use of “hormone free” language on dairy labels.  The agreement by ODA is in settlement of a federal lawsuit initiated against the state of Ohio over three years ago by the International Dairy Foods Association  and Organic Trade Association.  A federal appeals court ruled in favor of the associations in 2010, agreeing that Ohio’s dairy product labeling rule violated milk producers’ constitutional rights to conduct truthful commercial speech.  After the win on appeal, the associations filed a claim seeking reimbursement from Ohio for the $1.3 million in legal fees required to challenge the rule.  Apparently, the associations have agreed to drop that claim in exchange for Ohio’s withdrawal of the rule.  The ODA has not yet issued a formal statement on the settlement or officially rescinded the rule.

A retraction of the rule by ODA will impact labeling practices in the dairy industry in several ways.  The current rule prohibits milk composition claims such as “No Hormones”, “Hormone Free”, “rbST Free”, “rbGH Free” or “No Artificial Hormones” but allows statements that the dairy product derives from cows who did not receive artificial hormones.    Absent the rule,  companies will be able to make “hormone free” milk composition claims without the risk of an ODA enforcement action.   Also, a company will not be required to state that the FDA has not confirmed a difference between ”hormone free” products and other dairy products where the company permissibly states that the milk is from cows not receiving artificial hormones.  Additionally, withdrawing the rule removes provisions requiring those who claim that a dairy product is ”hormone free” to be prepared to verify the claim via producer signed affidavits, farm weight tickets and plant audit trails.

The Ohio dairy product labeling rule is contained in Ohio Admininstrative Code § 901:11-8-01.  For an explanation of the court of appeals decision on Ohio’s dairy labeling rule, see our earlier post.


American Agricultural Law Association meets in Texas

Ohio attorneys involved in AALA’s 32nd annual conference

The American Agricultural Law Association (AALA) has hosted another excellent educational event, recently concluded on October 22 in Austin, TX.  Approximately 250 attorneys, law students and professionals across the United States attended the conference.  Ohio attendees were visible on the program in several ways, including:

  • Paul L. Wright of Wright Law Co., LPA presented on “Estate Planning in a Climate of Change.”
  • Robert Moore of Wright Law Co., LPA presented on “Partnerships:  the Neglected, the Disaster and the Desirable Plan.”
  • Peggy Hall of The Ohio State University presented on “Animal Welfare Litigation Impacting Livestock Producers: Emerging Issues.”
  • Larry Gearhardt of Ohio Farm Bureau Federation received an AALA Excellence in Agricultural Law award.
  • Peggy Hall of The Ohio State University was inducted as the AALA’s President Elect.

Nashville, Tennessee is the site of the AALA’s 2012 conference, which will take place October 19-20.  For more information on the AALA, visit http://aglaw-assn.org.

Ohio Livestock Care Standards Released

There have been several meeting held around the state where the Ohio Livestock Care Standards Board have presented their recommendations.  David Tornero from the Ohio Department of Agriculture has made video clips of  the Ohio Livestock Care Standards meeting.  They are broken up by the topics of Dr. Glauer’s Powerpoint presentation.  These videos are being posted as educational information for our readers.

 History and Process  http://youtu.be/OdqXbkYJIow

 Outreach and Definitions  http://youtu.be/XOtwhltB6LU

 Water and Feed  http://youtu.be/us0sraF6wNc

 Management  http://youtu.be/nIfJRVb26Sk 

 Health   http://youtu.be/D7yngXIHhm0

 Transportation  http://youtu.be/ab-4JCEq21s

 Euthanasia  http://youtu.be/62E8QPtSUDY

 Enforcement  http://youtu.be/XlRuFkX2AFA

 Enforcement (Dr, Forshey)  http://youtu.be/dlO8rhtM6jY