PDA

View Full Version : Let them eat ethanol!



LWW
04-28-2008, 05:32 AM
About a year ago I was flamed on more than one forum for not being willing to take every possible but unproven chance to fight GW ... remember, err on the side of caution?

I was flamed again for stating that an attempt to control what we don't even understand would be not unlike a caveman attempting brain surgery with a pointy stick and a sharp rock ... our only chance was blind luck and/or divine intervention.

I suggested that we attempt to clean the air and water via what we know, accepting that global climate control was but a Goremon fantasy, and not what we do on a wing and a prayer.

Well, our chickens are coming home to roost and they have brought with them the vengeance of the law of unintended consequences.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Them Eat Ethanol?
Behind the food fight.

By Mona Charen

They don’t have enough to eat. Five people are dead in Port Au Prince, Haiti after a week of food riots. Unions in Burkina Faso have called a general strike to protest the high cost of grain. Food riots have rocked Egypt, Cameroon, Indonesia, Ethiopia, and other nations. In Manila, police with M-16s have supervised the sale and distribution of subsidized grain. Hoarders have been threatened with life imprisonment. In Thailand and Pakistan, troops are guarding fields and warehouses. In Egypt, the army has been called out to bake bread. Even in the United States, a run on rice has caused big-box retailers Sam’s Club and Costco to limit the amount of rice consumers can purchase per visit (though the cap is extremely generous — each customer can buy four 20 pound bags of rice per day at Costco).

The inflation in food prices worldwide — prices have soared 83 percent in the past three years, according to the World Bank — has a number of causes. Certainly increased demand from India and China — nations that until quite recently maintained hundreds of millions of people at subsistence levels — is part of the explanation. The Chinese and Indians are eating better, but their enhanced diets are putting pressure on supply. And our good friends at OPEC can take a bow. The oil sheikhs and that great tribune of the poor, Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, are doing their parts to plunge millions of poor people around the globe into starvation by artificially boosting the price of oil (which is required to grow food and transport it).

We in the U.S. and the European Union are not blameless either. Not by a long shot. In our search for cleaner energy we jumped aboard the “biofuels” bandwagon. This debacle should be an object lesson. Fighting global warming (if there is global warming) is a tricky business and can only be undertaken after careful review of the costs and benefits.

It seemed like such a painless solution. It fits on a bumper sticker. In fact, I saw one yesterday: “Don’t burn fuel. Grow it.” The EU adopted a goal of producing 10 percent of its fuel for road transportation from biofuels by 2020. The U.S. government (cheered on by the agriculture industry and environmentalists) adopted a mandate of 36 billion gallons of biofuel production by 2022 — a five-fold increase over 2006 levels amounting to 28 percent of the U.S. grain harvest. Congress and the president joined hands to pass this feel-good legislation just when, as the Wall Street Journal pointed out, new data were demonstrating that biofuels cost more energy than they save. “…When the hidden costs of conversion are included, greenhouse-gas emissions from corn ethanol over the next 30 years will be twice as high as from regular gasoline. In the long term, it will take 167 years before the reduction in carbon emissions from using ethanol ‘pays back’ the carbon released by land-use change.”

The amount of global warming that this investment in biofuels was designed to obviate was truly trifling (if GW exists at all). Economist Bjorn Lomborg’s work (see The Skeptical Environmentalist and Cool It) is absolutely essential to understanding this issue. He has pointed out that even if all of the world’s industrial nations reduced their outputs of greenhouse gases by 20 percent as the Kyoto Protocol would have required by 2012 (and many of the signatories are not on track), the reduction of global warming would have been 0.1 F degrees lower than it would otherwise have been, thus delaying global warming by a mere five years.

The costs, on the other hand, of meeting these or other targets are substantial. There are the opportunity costs — funds spent on reducing global warming are diverted from other worthy efforts like supplying clean drinking water to Africa, fighting malaria, and improving flood control infrastructure. And as we are now seeing on our front pages, there are direct costs like dramatically increasing the price of food and pushing millions of poor people to desperation.

“When millions of people are going hungry,” Palaniappan Chidambaram, India’s finance minister told the Journal, “it’s a crime against humanity that food should be diverted to biofuels.”

This is not to suggest that all efforts to conserve energy or maintain the environment are folly. Rather, it’s a cautionary tale. How much environmental improvement do we really get and — this is paramount — at what price?</div></div>

Well, people are starving ... world oil prices are escalating as we foolishly put 2 gallons in to get the equivalent of 1 gallon out ... the problem, real or imagined, is being made worse and not better ... how long before we back away from the madness?

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=Y2RlZDllZDQzNzdkOTY4ZjE1OWI5NjgxMWI5ZGVhMWE=

LWW

Qtec
04-28-2008, 05:57 AM
This must be a first but I agree with you. IMO, The ethanol business is a huge scam.
Q

LWW
04-28-2008, 08:43 AM
Q, I commend you.

To most on the radical left ... dead brown and yellow people are a huge inconvenience.

They are usually perceived by that crowd as a propaganda prop to be rolled out when needed and left to die afterwards.

LWW

Deeman3
04-28-2008, 09:09 AM
I believe John MCCain is the only one who has had the guts to identify this scam as a scam, among the three candidates.

Now that Nebraska is behind them, maybe they will "notice" the hypocracy of Ethynol.

hondo
04-28-2008, 09:25 AM
Ironic, isn't it, Q?
He has a decent post and then he follows it up
by implying that the left cares nothing for
human life while the right loves people of all color.
Many of his posts have me wishing I could smack him upside
his pumpkin head. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/mad.gif

LWW
04-28-2008, 11:05 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ironic, isn't it, Q?
He has a decent post and then he follows it up
by implying that the left cares nothing for
human life while the right loves people of all color.
Many of his posts have me wishing I could smack him upside
his pumpkin head. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/mad.gif </div></div>
And of course I didn't say that hondo ... but, you al;ready knew that.

I said "MOST" and if you choose to lump yourself in with "MOST" I'm unsurprised.

As much as I disagree with Q, he does see red, brown, and yellow people as more than a theater prop to run out on TV.

LWW

bsmutz
04-28-2008, 11:30 AM
All hail the mighty LWW for being the only person that had the foresight to see this coming. You are so wise and wonderful. What will we do when you are gone...



That's right, party like a mofo.

LWW
04-28-2008, 12:05 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bsmutz</div><div class="ubbcode-body">All hail the mighty LWW for being the only person that had the foresight to see this coming. You are so wise and wonderful. What will we do when you are gone...



That's right, party like a mofo. </div></div>
Well, I'm far from the only one who saw this coming ... but, at least I'm not a partisan fool who refuses to hear it.

BTW, I would expect you to party ... it must suck always being the village idiot.

LWW

bsmutz
04-28-2008, 03:55 PM
Oh, yeah, you were the one who was all proud of himself for donating... what was it?... 5200 grains of rice. I'm sure you'll get the nod for humanitarian of the year. Sorry about the village idiot thing. Out here, we wouldn't invite you to the party either so don't think moving is going to change anything. If only you'd paid attention in school. Of course, you were probably too busy telling yourself how great you were.

LWW
04-28-2008, 05:05 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bsmutz</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Oh, yeah, you were the one who was all proud of himself for donating... what was it?... 5200 grains of rice. I'm sure you'll get the nod for humanitarian of the year. Sorry about the village idiot thing. Out here, we wouldn't invite you to the party either so don't think moving is going to change anything. If only you'd paid attention in school. Of course, you were probably too busy telling yourself how great you were. </div></div>
Why don't you do the right thing and admit you don't give a chicken cluck that people are starving unless they can be used as a prop for a B-B-B-BUT B-B-B-B-OOOOSH! tirade.

You might regain a little self respect.

LWW

wolfdancer
04-28-2008, 06:52 PM
Well, from an earlier post by the resident twit here....one would think that Al Gore invented ethanol....
It's not exactly new news, exposing the details about ethanol...might be new to the "genius" though....he's usually a day late and a dollar short.....

wolfdancer
04-29-2008, 12:20 AM
This corn-into-fuel program has been around for years but gained vast new impetus from President Bush's program to cure America's "addiction to oil" by using biofuels. We'll grow our way to self-sufficiency. Oh, well. Not only are oil prices at all-time highs (in dollar terms), but diverting agricultural land to energy production is a major factor in the rise of worldwide food prices. We've had food riots in Mexico and Egypt. Even in the U.S., Costco and Sam's Club are rationing rice. Creepy.
Had the Bush administration and Congress exhibited the wisdom and courage to slap a big honking gasoline tax on drivers after 9/11 - or even in 2006, when the President made his "addiction to oil" speech - it would have been a better energy policy than the cornographic panacea they've given us. We could have reduced consumption, cut oil imports, kept low-income drivers whole by rebating their gas taxes with income tax breaks, and used the rest of the proceeds for deficit reduction or something else useful. Food would be cheaper. So would fuel, because demand would be lower and we'd probably have fewer financial speculators, who some experts think are responsible for $25 worth of oil's march from $64 a barrel a year ago to $119 as Fortune goes to press.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/04/25/magazines/fortune/sloan_ethanol.fortune/?postversion=2008042808

LWW
04-29-2008, 02:31 AM
Wolfie, when will you ever learn that an opinion piece is just an opinion ... the fact is that ethanol is a cornerstone of the Goremon faith.

And, yes, Bush is to blame for not doing something to reverse this idiocy sooner.

Again, it goes back to his biggest fault. If he tried to reverse this tomorrow you and the Goremons would bleat B-B-B-BUT B-B-B-BOOOOSH! at the tops of your lungs.

Doesn't that water get heavy?

LWW

Deeman3
04-29-2008, 07:29 AM
Wolfdancer,

I can't argue that this has been handled very badly. I even wish i could agrre that one of the three candidates had good ideas or policy to solve the problems. I don't.

It is hard to argue that Bush has not made the oil situation worse. Hey, that's a "gottcha" from me!

I am close to giving up on politics. I can't support any of them right now. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/frown.gif

LWW
04-29-2008, 08:59 AM
Bush just re endorsed ethanol ... and the madness continues.

LWW