ITK in Grain Storage.

1. R P SINGH
Associate Director Extension
G B Pant University of Agri. & Tech. Pantnagar

2. BACKGROUND
• Project on ‘ Wood and
Stone Houses’ under
Mission Mode of ITK
Validation.
• Several old structures
found earthquake
resistant.
• The grain storage
structures were also
centre of attraction in Wood and Stone Houses
the houses.

3. Why it has attraction?
Special security and
attention

4. Scenario
There has been bumper production of wheat and
rice for the last two years consecutively. The
government godowns are overflowing with wheat
and rice stocks and the Food Corporation of India
(FCI) is facing a storage crunch. The country
produced 86 million tonne wheat and 95 million
tonne rice in the 2010-11 crop year.
As per the second estimate, there is record
production of wheat at 88 million tonne and
unprecedented production of rice at 102 million
tonne this year. The government expects further rise
in the production in the final estimates.
- Union agriculture secretary Prabeer Kumar Basu.
Feb. 13, 2012, Economic Times

5. Conti..
 Post-harvest losses in India amount to 12 to
16 million metric tons of food grains each year,
an amount that the World Bank stipulates could
feed one-third of India's poor. The monetary
value of these losses amounts to more than Rs
50,000 crores per year (Singh, 2010).
 Natural contamination of food grains is
greatly influenced by environmental factors
such as type of storage structure, temperature,
pH, moisture, etc (Sashidhar et al, 1992).

6. Conti…

7. Grains are precious
• Food security is most
important in remote.
• Theft of grains was
common in lean period.
• Wooden structures with
carving shows their
importance.
• Wooden structure
provides strength to
security and bad
conduction for
temperature.

8. Wooden Storage Structure
 Used in hilly and cold
areas called ‘Bakharas’
 Size 8’x 6’
 Small outlets to avoid
moisture exposure in
the store while,
drawing grains.
 Provision for Locking.

9. Double Layer Storage Technique
•Wooden planks
for making
plate form.
• Entry point for
ground floor.
• Door size 2.5’ x
2’
• Shutting knob.

10. Mud & Straw based structure
 Used for out door
storage.
 Prepared by mud and
straw.
 Plastered and painted
by by clay and cow
dung.
 Plate form raised for 1’
 Covered by striped
biomass

11. Bamboo and Mud based Structure
• Known as Gummi in Asam.
• Prepared by Bamboo and
mud.
• Plastered and painted by by
clay and cow dung..
• Wheat straw is used for
sealing the grain bags in the
Gummi.
• Covered with striped
biomass of sugar cane.

12. Indoor Punjab, Haryana, U. P.
 Used in
Uttarakhand, Rajasthan and
Himachal Pradesh
Made with clay, wheat straw and cow
dung.
 Plastered and painted by clay and cow
dung.
 Wall thickness about 2-4 inches
 An opening at upper side of Kothi for
filling the grains. The opening is covered
with a disc made of same materials.
 An opening is made at front at lower
side to draw the grains. It has also
covered with a socket made up of same
materials.
 After filling the grains it is plastered
and painted with pest made of clay and
Kothi cow dung.

13. Earthen pot
 Used in Haryana, U P,
Punjab, M P, Jharkhand
and Bihar.
Made up of sandy clay
and burnt in fire to make
harden.
 Painted by water colour.
 Walls are 1-2 cm. thick.
Mataka
 Capacity varies about 5-
10 lts.
 Single opening with
cover.

14. Wooden box  Used in Karnataka,
A P, MP,
Chattishgarh.
 Size varies W 2-3’ L
4-6’ and H 2-4’
 Wooden plank 0.5-
1.0 inch
 Some time inside
partition.
 Capacity varies 60-
100 kg.
Sanduk

15. Rigal/Bamboo Basket
 Used in Himachal
Pradesh, Uttarakhand,
Jharkhand and Asam.
 Weaved by twigs/ strips.
 Plastered by cow dung.
 Single opening at upper
side.
 Capacity varies 5-10 kg.
Peru

16. Technology
The technology is complex and complete, involving many factors
and many new practices, it can be adopted piecemeal, although
none of the pieces bring the advantages that the entire technology
does. The end result for the recipient must be the ability to use,
replicate, improve and, possibly re-sell the technology.
 Technology recipients should be able to identify and select
technologies that are appropriate to their actual needs,
circumstances and capacities.
 ESTs protect the environment, are less polluting, use resources
in a sustainable manner, recycle more of their wastes and
products, and handle all residual wastes in a more environmentally
acceptable way that the technologies for which they are
substitutes.
 Preferably a technology recipient will go even further, and select
a “sustainable technology” – i.e. a technology that is not only
environmentally sound but also economically viable and socially
acceptable.

17. Highlights of indigenous storage methods
• Wooden/ Mud structures provide bad conduction to out
side temperature and inside temperature.
•Bamboo structures made on a raised timber or stone
platform protect grain from rat damage and prevent
moisture absorption from the ground.
• Regular mud plastering is required for a variety of
indoor and outdoor storage containers and structures for
increasing their life span and ensuring safe storage of
grains.
• The structures made of indigenous material like
bamboo, straw and other locally available materials.
• Indigenous storage structures are not suitable for
storing grains for very long periods.

18. Need of the hour
 FCI can keep the stocks with the farmers instead of purchasing
the grain from them. As per the present categorization in vogue
that if a farmer stores the grain without infestation then he
should be given some incentive apart from normal government
price. This would encourage the farmers to store the grains
properly and ultimately it would lead to zero loss level and the
pressure on storage space with FCI can also be reduced.
Bisht B S. and G. Singh, 2011
Develop bins or storage structures with the qualities available
in indigenous technical knowhow.
 Design small storage structures for region specific conditions.
It will help in reducing storage losses.
 Materials of storage structures may be used for
environmentally suitable, economically viable and socially
acceptable.
 Storage technology may be evolved scientifically improved and
replicable at regional level.

19. Conclusion
Natural contamination of food grains is greatly
influenced by environmental factors such as type of
storage structure, temperature, pH, moisture, etc. At
any given time 60-70% of grains is stored on the farm
in traditional structures like Bakhara,Kanaja, Kothi,
Sanduka, earthern pots, and Gummi . However
indigenous storage structures are suitable for storing
grains in their region specific conditions. Here in lies
the significance of improved storage structures for
specific region and scientific storage of grains in form
of warehouses. These provide safe and economical
means of grain storage for long durations. Need of the
hour is to strengthen traditional means of storage
with modern inputs and to provide cheaper storage to
farmers so as prevent enormous storage losses.