3. On-farm sorting trials
2.00%
Kernel Recovery (%)
1.50%
1.00%
0.50%
0.00%
After dehuskFirstfirst sort
and sort Second Sort
After Storage and resort
4. Weight of Purely Reject NIS (kg) removed per 1000
TKR
kg of NIS to reduce the reject level by 1%
25.00%
26.00%
Reject NIS 40
quality
38
27.00% 37
28.00% 36
29.00% 34
30.00% 33
31.00% 32
32.00% 31
33.00% 30
34.00% 29
35.00% 29
36.00% 28
37.00% 27
38.00% 26
39.00% 26
5. It’s all about speed….
• Speed from the tree to being packed
• While growers are “sorting for quality” they
are potentially degrading shelf-life through:
• Holding NIS in inadequate storage
facilities
• Sorting while they could harvest
• Spending money that may not need to be
eg gas, electricity, wages
6. How to do it fast!
• We developed a system that allows
growers to deliver with some husk, trash,
FM and gross rejects (within limits) to
achieve speed
7. Technology is the key
1980 2012
1980 State of the art computer $10,000
2012 – “Basic” smart phone - $500
18. Conclusion
• Focus on consumer quality
• Technology has allowed us to do more
• Growers are seeing a 10-15c/kg saving in
on farm costs by using the full system
• Plus increased production per hectare
• How much kernel have we as an industry
lost over the years???????????
• How much shelf-life have we lost over the
years???????
19. Quality is made in the
paddock
We can only preserve it after that,
not improve it
