Ethanol and the law of unintended consequences

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/g/a/2008/04/02/cstillwell.DTL&type=printable

Fuel or folly?

Ethanol and the law of unintended consequences

by Cinnamon Stillwell Wednesday, April 2, 2008

In the pantheon of well-intentioned governmental policies gone awry,

massive ethanol biofuel production may go down as one of the biggest

blunders in history. An unholy alliance of environmentalists,

agribusiness, biofuel corporations and politicians has been touting

ethanol as the cure to all our environmental ills, when in fact it may

be doing more harm than good. An array of unintended consequences is

wreaking havoc on the economy, food production and, perhaps most

ironically, the environment.

Biofuels are fuels distilled from plant matter. Ethanol is corn-based,

but other common biofuel sources include soybeans, sugar cane and palm

oil, an edible vegetable oil. In the search for alternatives to fossil

fuels, many countries have turned to biofuels, which has led to a

booming business for those involved. In the United States, ethanol is

the primary focus and, as a result, corn growers and ethanol producers

are subsidized heavily by the government.

But it turns out that the use of food for fuel is wrought with

difficulties. Corn, or some derivative thereof, is a common ingredient

in a variety of packaged food products. So it's only natural that, as

it becomes a rarer commodity due to the conflicting demands of biofuel

production, the prices of those products will go up. The prices of

food products containing barley and wheat are also on the rise as

farmers switch to growing subsidized corn crops. During a time of

economic instability, the last thing Americans need is higher prices

at the grocery store, but that's exactly what they're getting.

At the same time, corn is the main ingredient in livestock feed and

its dearth is causing prices of those products to rise as well.

Farmers have had to scramble to find alternative sources of feed for

their livestock and, in some cases, have had to sell off animals they

can no longer afford to feed. This, in turn, has led to an increase in

the price of meat and dairy products for consumers.

The hit on the livestock industry has also affected jobs, with

countless employees being laid off due to the downturn. Pilgrim's

Pride Corp., the nation's largest chicken producer, announced in March

that it was closing a North Carolina chicken processing plant, and six

of 13 U.S. distribution centers, due to the jump in feed costs. Even

Iowa, the state that produces the most corn and therefore the supposed

beneficiary of new jobs due to ethanol production, has seen its

unemployment rate rise over the past year. The plant layoffs and

closings already underway due to global competition and the

fluctuating market have continued unabated.

Another adverse impact of ethanol production is potential water

shortage. One gallon of ethanol requires four gallons of water to

produce. According to a recent report from the National Research

Council, an institution that focuses on science, engineering,

technology and health, "increased production could greatly increase

pressure on water supplies for drinking, industry, hydropower, fish

habitat and recreation."

Not only is ethanol less productive than gasoline as a fuel source,

its production is hurting the environment it was intended to preserve,

particularly in the Third World. The amount of land needed to grow

corn and other biofuel sources means that their production is leading

to deforestation, the destruction of wetlands and grasslands, species

extinction, displacement of indigenous peoples and small farmers, and

loss of habitats that store carbon.

Scientists predict that the Gulf of Mexico, already polluted by

agricultural runoff from the United States, will only get worse as

demand for ethanol, and therefore corn, increases. Meanwhile, rain

forests throughout Central and South America are being razed to make

way for land to grow biofuel components. Tortilla shortages in Mexico,

rising flour prices in Pakistan, Indonesian and Malaysian forests

being cut down and burned to make palm oil, and encroachments upon the

Amazon rainforest due to Brazilian sugar cane production -- all these

developments indicate that biofuels are turning out to be more

destructive than helpful.

The latest issue of Time magazine addresses the subject in frightening

detail. Michael Grunwald, author of the cover story, "The Clean Energy

Scam," posits a worldwide epidemic that could end up being a greater

disaster than all the alleged evils of fossil fuels combined. As he

puts it:

"Deforestation accounts for 20 percent of all current carbon

emissions. So unless the world can eliminate emissions from all other

sources -- cars, power plants, factories, even flatulent cows -- it

needs to reduce deforestation or risk an environmental catastrophe.

That means limiting the expansion of agriculture, a daunting task as

the world's population keeps expanding. And saving forests is probably

an impossibility so long as vast expanses of cropland are used to grow

modest amounts of fuel. The biofuels boom, in short, is one that could

haunt the planet for generations -- and it's only getting started."

Accordingly, the United Nations has expressed skepticism about ethanol

and other biofuels. But the European Union seems to have bought into

the biofuel craze with proposed legislation to mandate its use. This

proposal has set off alarm bells in the United Kingdom, particularly

with the British government's chief science advisor, Professor John

Beddington, who has warned that a food and deforestation crisis is

likely to overtake any climate concerns. "The idea that you cut down

rainforest to actually grow biofuels seems profoundly stupid," he

stated. Similarly, the British government's top environmental

scientist, Professor Robert Watson, called the policy "totally

insane."

Some British environmentalists apparently agree, as do members of the

American environmental movement. As noted in the aforementioned Time

article, the Natural Resources Defense Council's Nathanael Greene, the

author of a 2004 report that rallied fellow environmentalists to

support biofuels, is "looking at the numbers in an entirely new way,"

now that biofuel production exists on such a large scale.

None of this has deterred American politicians from jumping on the

ethanol bandwagon. No doubt, they see it as a means of garnering

political support from the farm lobby and in particular ethanol

producers, to whom they have provided generous federal subsidies.

Indeed, President Bush, who according to his 2006 State of the Union

address is a switchgrass enthusiast, has signed a bipartisan energy

bill that will greatly increase support to the ethanol industry, as

well as mandating the production of 36 billion gallons of biofuel by

2022.

In an election year, there has been no shortage of environmental

platitudes aimed at voters and, inevitably, ethanol has been a

mainstay. Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has been

singing the praises of ethanol in Iowa, while her rival, Barack Obama,

merely criticized her for not doing so earlier. Republican candidate

John McCain, once an ardent opponent of ethanol, has suddenly become a

convert.

The motto among both Democrats and Republicans on this issue seems to

be "If it sounds good, push it," and a gullible public -- seduced by

climate change hysteria and a "Going Green!" advertising onslaught --

is buying into it.

While the search for alternatives to fossil fuels, and in particular

the dependence upon foreign sources thereof, is laudable, future

avenues must be considered more carefully. As the looming ethanol

disaster has demonstrated, yet again, the road to hell is paved with

good intentions.

----------------

For full biofuel facts, see http://home.att.net/~meditation/bio-fuel-hoax.html

Christopher Calder

calderhome@yahoo.com wrote:

> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/g/a/2008/04/02/cstillwell.DTL&type=printable

>

> Fuel or folly?

>

> Ethanol and the law of unintended consequences

>

> by Cinnamon Stillwell Wednesday, April 2, 2008

>

> In the pantheon of well-intentioned governmental policies gone awry,

> massive ethanol biofuel production may go down as one of the biggest

> blunders in history. An unholy alliance of environmentalists,

> agribusiness, biofuel corporations and politicians has been touting

> ethanol as the cure to all our environmental ills, when in fact it may

> be doing more harm than good. An array of unintended consequences is

> wreaking havoc on the economy, food production and, perhaps most

> ironically, the environment.

>

> Biofuels are fuels distilled from plant matter. Ethanol is corn-based,

> but other common biofuel sources include soybeans, sugar cane and palm

> oil, an edible vegetable oil. In the search for alternatives to fossil

> fuels, many countries have turned to biofuels, which has led to a

> booming business for those involved. In the United States, ethanol is

> the primary focus and, as a result, corn growers and ethanol producers

> are subsidized heavily by the government.

>

> But it turns out that the use of food for fuel is wrought with

> difficulties. Corn, or some derivative thereof, is a common ingredient

> in a variety of packaged food products. So it's only natural that, as

> it becomes a rarer commodity due to the conflicting demands of biofuel

> production, the prices of those products will go up.

Nope. There's plenty of nonedible GM corn and plenty of other non-food

plant species to use. The current price artifacts are temporary.

HarryNadds wrote:

> On Apr 2, 2:29 pm, "Ouroboros_Rex" <i...@casual.com> wrote:

>> calderh...@yahoo.com wrote:

>>> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/g/a/2008/04/02/cstill...

>>

>>> Fuel or folly?

>>

>>> Ethanol and the law of unintended consequences

>>

>>> by Cinnamon Stillwell Wednesday, April 2, 2008

>>

>>> In the pantheon of well-intentioned governmental policies gone awry,

>>> massive ethanol biofuel production may go down as one of the biggest

>>> blunders in history. An unholy alliance of environmentalists,

>>> agribusiness, biofuel corporations and politicians has been touting

>>> ethanol as the cure to all our environmental ills, when in fact it

>>> may be doing more harm than good. An array of unintended

>>> consequences is wreaking havoc on the economy, food production and,

>>> perhaps most ironically, the environment.

>>

>>> Biofuels are fuels distilled from plant matter. Ethanol is

>>> corn-based, but other common biofuel sources include soybeans,

>>> sugar cane and palm oil, an edible vegetable oil. In the search for

>>> alternatives to fossil fuels, many countries have turned to

>>> biofuels, which has led to a booming business for those involved.

>>> In the United States, ethanol is the primary focus and, as a

>>> result, corn growers and ethanol producers are subsidized heavily

>>> by the government.

>>

>>> But it turns out that the use of food for fuel is wrought with

>>> difficulties. Corn, or some derivative thereof, is a common

>>> ingredient in a variety of packaged food products. So it's only

>>> natural that, as it becomes a rarer commodity due to the

>>> conflicting demands of biofuel production, the prices of those

>>> products will go up.

>>

>> Nope. There's plenty of nonedible GM corn and plenty of other

>> non-food

>> plant species to use. The current price artifacts are temporary.-

>> Hide quoted text -

>>

>> - Show quoted text -

>

> Why not tap into the mass quantities of methane gas and hot air from

> the democrat party??

As usual, the right winger has nothing. lol

Bill Miller wrote:

> <calderhome@yahoo.com> wrote in message

> news:cbee7e55-9b4c-4f4b-827f-a08efe7619ba@s13g2000prd.googlegroups.com...

>>

> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/g/a/2008/04/02/cstillwell.DTL&type=printable

>>

>> Fuel or folly?

>>

>> Ethanol and the law of unintended consequences

>>

>> by Cinnamon Stillwell Wednesday, April 2, 2008

>>

>> In the pantheon of well-intentioned governmental policies gone awry,

>> massive ethanol biofuel production may go down as one of the biggest

>> blunders in history. An unholy alliance of environmentalists,

>> agribusiness, biofuel corporations and politicians has been touting

>> ethanol as the cure to all our environmental ills, when in fact it

>> may be doing more harm than good. An array of unintended

>> consequences is wreaking havoc on the economy, food production and,

>> perhaps most ironically, the environment.

>>

> If either one of the three liberals running for Potus win, you can

> expect the UN well be calling the shots for what we can grow in the

> US. The canidates all want to sign on to LOST ( The Law of The Sea

> Treaty ). There is hidden away in the treaty in fine print that there

> can be repercussions for any nation that pollutes the UNs oceans.

> Everyone knows corn is one of the worse crops you can plant for damage

> to the seas. We should start drilling for gas and oil off our coasts

> before the UN takes over the floor of all the worlds oceans.

Oh no, the UN! They want to take over the world, with their

can't-get-anything-done assemblage of powerless ambassadors kept down by the

USA! RUN!!!!

On Apr 2, 9:00 pm, "Ouroboros_Rex" <i...@casual.com> wrote:

> HarryNadds wrote:

> > On Apr 2, 2:29 pm, "Ouroboros_Rex" <i...@casual.com> wrote:

> >> calderh...@yahoo.com wrote:

> >>>http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/g/a/2008/04/02/cstill...

>

> >>> Fuel or folly?

>

> >>> Ethanol and the law of unintended consequences

>

> >>> by Cinnamon Stillwell Wednesday, April 2, 2008

>

> >>> In the pantheon of well-intentioned governmental policies gone awry,

> >>> massive ethanol biofuel production may go down as one of the biggest

> >>> blunders in history. An unholy alliance of environmentalists,

> >>> agribusiness, biofuel corporations and politicians has been touting

> >>> ethanol as the cure to all our environmental ills, when in fact it

> >>> may be doing more harm than good. An array of unintended

> >>> consequences is wreaking havoc on the economy, food production and,

> >>> perhaps most ironically, the environment.

>

> >>> Biofuels are fuels distilled from plant matter. Ethanol is

> >>> corn-based, but other common biofuel sources include soybeans,

> >>> sugar cane and palm oil, an edible vegetable oil. In the search for

> >>> alternatives to fossil fuels, many countries have turned to

> >>> biofuels, which has led to a booming business for those involved.

> >>> In the United States, ethanol is the primary focus and, as a

> >>> result, corn growers and ethanol producers are subsidized heavily

> >>> by the government.

>

> >>> But it turns out that the use of food for fuel is wrought with

> >>> difficulties. Corn, or some derivative thereof, is a common

> >>> ingredient in a variety of packaged food products. So it's only

> >>> natural that, as it becomes a rarer commodity due to the

> >>> conflicting demands of biofuel production, the prices of those

> >>> products will go up.

>

> >> Nope. There's plenty of nonedible GM corn and plenty of other

> >> non-food

> >> plant species to use. The current price artifacts are temporary.-

> >> Hide quoted text -

>

> >> - Show quoted text -

>

> > Why not tap into the mass quantities of methane gas and hot air from

> > the democrat party??

>

> As usual, the right winger has nothing. lol

NINCOMPOOP

On Apr 2, 3:29 pm, "Ouroboros_Rex" <i...@casual.com> wrote:

> calderh...@yahoo.com wrote:

> >http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/g/a/2008/04/02/cstill...

>

> > Fuel or folly?

>

> > Ethanol and the law of unintended consequences

>

> > by Cinnamon Stillwell Wednesday, April 2, 2008

>

> > In the pantheon of well-intentioned governmental policies gone awry,

> > massive ethanol biofuel production may go down as one of the biggest

> > blunders in history. An unholy alliance of environmentalists,

> > agribusiness, biofuel corporations and politicians has been touting

> > ethanol as the cure to all our environmental ills, when in fact it may

> > be doing more harm than good. An array of unintended consequences is

> > wreaking havoc on the economy, food production and, perhaps most

> > ironically, the environment.

>

> > Biofuels are fuels distilled from plant matter. Ethanol is corn-based,

> > but other common biofuel sources include soybeans, sugar cane and palm

> > oil, an edible vegetable oil. In the search for alternatives to fossil

> > fuels, many countries have turned to biofuels, which has led to a

> > booming business for those involved. In the United States, ethanol is

> > the primary focus and, as a result, corn growers and ethanol producers

> > are subsidized heavily by the government.

>

> > But it turns out that the use of food for fuel is wrought with

> > difficulties. Corn, or some derivative thereof, is a common ingredient

> > in a variety of packaged food products. So it's only natural that, as

> > it becomes a rarer commodity due to the conflicting demands of biofuel

> > production, the prices of those products will go up.

>

> Nope. There's plenty of nonedible GM corn and plenty of other non-food

> plant species to use. The current price artifacts are temporary.

Nobody celebrates failure like a lib-turd demonkrap.

the demonkrap motto:

Better living through self-delusion.

chemist wrote:

> On Apr 2, 9:00 pm, "Ouroboros_Rex" <i...@casual.com> wrote:

>> HarryNadds wrote:

>>> On Apr 2, 2:29 pm, "Ouroboros_Rex" <i...@casual.com> wrote:

>>>> calderh...@yahoo.com wrote:

>>>>> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/g/a/2008/04/02/cstill...

>>

>>>>> Fuel or folly?

>>

>>>>> Ethanol and the law of unintended consequences

>>

>>>>> by Cinnamon Stillwell Wednesday, April 2, 2008

>>

>>>>> In the pantheon of well-intentioned governmental policies gone

>>>>> awry, massive ethanol biofuel production may go down as one of

>>>>> the biggest blunders in history. An unholy alliance of

>>>>> environmentalists, agribusiness, biofuel corporations and

>>>>> politicians has been touting ethanol as the cure to all our

>>>>> environmental ills, when in fact it may be doing more harm than

>>>>> good. An array of unintended consequences is wreaking havoc on

>>>>> the economy, food production and, perhaps most ironically, the

>>>>> environment.

>>

>>>>> Biofuels are fuels distilled from plant matter. Ethanol is

>>>>> corn-based, but other common biofuel sources include soybeans,

>>>>> sugar cane and palm oil, an edible vegetable oil. In the search

>>>>> for alternatives to fossil fuels, many countries have turned to

>>>>> biofuels, which has led to a booming business for those involved.

>>>>> In the United States, ethanol is the primary focus and, as a

>>>>> result, corn growers and ethanol producers are subsidized heavily

>>>>> by the government.

>>

>>>>> But it turns out that the use of food for fuel is wrought with

>>>>> difficulties. Corn, or some derivative thereof, is a common

>>>>> ingredient in a variety of packaged food products. So it's only

>>>>> natural that, as it becomes a rarer commodity due to the

>>>>> conflicting demands of biofuel production, the prices of those

>>>>> products will go up.

>>

>>>> Nope. There's plenty of nonedible GM corn and plenty of other

>>>> non-food

>>>> plant species to use. The current price artifacts are temporary.-

>>>> Hide quoted text -

>>

>>>> - Show quoted text -

>>

>>> Why not tap into the mass quantities of methane gas and hot air from

>>> the democrat party??

>>

>> As usual, the right winger has nothing. lol

>

> NINCOMPOOP

ROFLMAO You really have a hardon for me now, don't you, tommy? What's the

matter, no experiment to sabotage or basic chemical principle to

misunderstand? Maybe you could tell us more about your imaginary numerical

analyses based on statistics idiocy, that was pretty funny.

If you want to make things uncomfortable here, chief, I can make them

very, very uncomfortable for you. Say the word.

<calderhome@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:cbee7e55-9b4c-4f4b-827f-a08efe7619ba@s13g2000prd.googlegroups.com...

>

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/g/a/2008/04/02/cstillwell.DTL&type=printable

>

> Fuel or folly?

>

> Ethanol and the law of unintended consequences

>

> by Cinnamon Stillwell Wednesday, April 2, 2008

>

> In the pantheon of well-intentioned governmental policies gone awry,

> massive ethanol biofuel production may go down as one of the biggest

> blunders in history. An unholy alliance of environmentalists,

> agribusiness, biofuel corporations and politicians has been touting

> ethanol as the cure to all our environmental ills, when in fact it may

> be doing more harm than good. An array of unintended consequences is

> wreaking havoc on the economy, food production and, perhaps most

> ironically, the environment.

>

If either one of the three liberals running for Potus win, you can

expect the UN well be calling the shots for what we can grow in the US.

The canidates all want to sign on to LOST ( The Law of The Sea

Treaty ). There is hidden away in the treaty in fine print that there

can be repercussions for any nation that pollutes the UNs oceans.

Everyone knows corn is one of the worse crops you can plant for damage

to the seas. We should start drilling for gas and oil off our coasts

before the UN takes over the floor of all the worlds oceans.

HarryNadds wrote:

> On Apr 2, 2:29 pm, "Ouroboros_Rex" <i...@casual.com> wrote:

>> calderh...@yahoo.com wrote:

>>> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/g/a/2008/04/02/cstill....

>>> Fuel or folly?

>>> Ethanol and the law of unintended consequences

>>> by Cinnamon Stillwell Wednesday, April 2, 2008

>>> In the pantheon of well-intentioned governmental policies gone awry,

>>> massive ethanol biofuel production may go down as one of the biggest

>>> blunders in history. An unholy alliance of environmentalists,

>>> agribusiness, biofuel corporations and politicians has been touting

>>> ethanol as the cure to all our environmental ills, when in fact it may

>>> be doing more harm than good. An array of unintended consequences is

>>> wreaking havoc on the economy, food production and, perhaps most

>>> ironically, the environment.

>>> Biofuels are fuels distilled from plant matter. Ethanol is corn-based,

>>> but other common biofuel sources include soybeans, sugar cane and palm

>>> oil, an edible vegetable oil. In the search for alternatives to fossil

>>> fuels, many countries have turned to biofuels, which has led to a

>>> booming business for those involved. In the United States, ethanol is

>>> the primary focus and, as a result, corn growers and ethanol producers

>>> are subsidized heavily by the government.

>>> But it turns out that the use of food for fuel is wrought with

>>> difficulties. Corn, or some derivative thereof, is a common ingredient

>>> in a variety of packaged food products. So it's only natural that, as

>>> it becomes a rarer commodity due to the conflicting demands of biofuel

>>> production, the prices of those products will go up.

>> Nope. There's plenty of nonedible GM corn and plenty of other non-food

>> plant species to use. The current price artifacts are temporary.- Hide quoted text -

>>

>> - Show quoted text -

>

> Why not tap into the mass quantities of methane gas and hot air from

> the democrat party??

It would pollute the planet.

Ouroboros_Rex wrote:

> calderhome@yahoo.com wrote:

>> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/g/a/2008/04/02/cstillwell.DTL&type=printable

>>

>> Fuel or folly?

>>

>> Ethanol and the law of unintended consequences

>>

>> by Cinnamon Stillwell Wednesday, April 2, 2008

>>

>> In the pantheon of well-intentioned governmental policies gone awry,

>> massive ethanol biofuel production may go down as one of the biggest

>> blunders in history. An unholy alliance of environmentalists,

>> agribusiness, biofuel corporations and politicians has been touting

>> ethanol as the cure to all our environmental ills, when in fact it may

>> be doing more harm than good. An array of unintended consequences is

>> wreaking havoc on the economy, food production and, perhaps most

>> ironically, the environment.

>>

>> Biofuels are fuels distilled from plant matter. Ethanol is corn-based,

>> but other common biofuel sources include soybeans, sugar cane and palm

>> oil, an edible vegetable oil. In the search for alternatives to fossil

>> fuels, many countries have turned to biofuels, which has led to a

>> booming business for those involved. In the United States, ethanol is

>> the primary focus and, as a result, corn growers and ethanol producers

>> are subsidized heavily by the government.

>>

>> But it turns out that the use of food for fuel is wrought with

>> difficulties. Corn, or some derivative thereof, is a common ingredient

>> in a variety of packaged food products. So it's only natural that, as

>> it becomes a rarer commodity due to the conflicting demands of biofuel

>> production, the prices of those products will go up.

>

> Nope. There's plenty of nonedible GM corn and plenty of other non-food

> plant species to use. The current price artifacts are temporary.

>

>

Yep the price will go up from here, as always.

Poetic Justice wrote:

> Ouroboros_Rex wrote:

>

>> calderhome@yahoo.com wrote:

>>

>>> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/g/a/2008/04/02/cstillwell.DTL&type=printable

>>>

>>>

>>> Fuel or folly?

>>>

>>> Ethanol and the law of unintended consequences

>>>

>>> by Cinnamon Stillwell Wednesday, April 2, 2008

>>>

>>> In the pantheon of well-intentioned governmental policies gone awry,

>>> massive ethanol biofuel production may go down as one of the biggest

>>> blunders in history. An unholy alliance of environmentalists,

>>> agribusiness, biofuel corporations and politicians has been touting

>>> ethanol as the cure to all our environmental ills, when in fact it may

>>> be doing more harm than good. An array of unintended consequences is

>>> wreaking havoc on the economy, food production and, perhaps most

>>> ironically, the environment.

>>>

>>> Biofuels are fuels distilled from plant matter. Ethanol is corn-based,

>>> but other common biofuel sources include soybeans, sugar cane and palm

>>> oil, an edible vegetable oil. In the search for alternatives to fossil

>>> fuels, many countries have turned to biofuels, which has led to a

>>> booming business for those involved. In the United States, ethanol is

>>> the primary focus and, as a result, corn growers and ethanol producers

>>> are subsidized heavily by the government.

>>>

>>> But it turns out that the use of food for fuel is wrought with

>>> difficulties. Corn, or some derivative thereof, is a common ingredient

>>> in a variety of packaged food products. So it's only natural that, as

>>> it becomes a rarer commodity due to the conflicting demands of biofuel

>>> production, the prices of those products will go up.

>>

>>

>> Nope. There's plenty of nonedible GM corn and plenty of other

>> non-food plant species to use. The current price artifacts are

>> temporary.

>>

> Yep the price will go up from here, as always.

Your pal's lying about the causes notwithstanding. =)

On Apr 2, 9:44 pm, "calderh...@yahoo.com" <calderh...@yahoo.com>

wrote:

> On Apr 2, 11:29 am, "Ouroboros_Rex" <i...@casual.com> wrote:

>

> "There's plenty of nonedible GM corn and plenty of other non-food

> plant species to use. The current price artifacts are temporary."

> ------------------------------------

> A new study from three agricultural economists at Iowa State

> University with insider information on the latest biofuel technology

> says ethanol made from cellulose will likely NEVER be affordable The

> Federal tax credits for ethanol made from cellulose would have to be

> raised from the current $.51 to $1.55 per gallon, which will be

> unacceptable to Congress and the American public. Switchgrass, crop

> waste, and wood chip biofuel schemes are too expensive to ever work!

>

> The newspaper article can be found here -http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2008/3/3/125745/7746

> The full study can be found here - pdf 180kb at:http://www.card.iastate.edu/publications/DBS/PDFFiles/08wp460.pdf

>

> Coming soon after the Princeton study published in SCIENCE showing

> that all biofuels are far worse for the environment and global warming

> than gasoline leaves the biofuel zealots little cover to hide behind.

> SEE -http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/1151861

>

> Please visit my page on biofuels, "The biofuel hoax is causing a world

> food crisis!" at:http://home.att.net/~meditation/bio-fuel-hoax.html This has a

> warehouse of information and links.

>

> I also have a short essay comparing the Bush biofuel plant to Mao's

> failed "Great Leap Forward" 5 year plan which led to the starvation of

> millions of Chinese at: http://home.att.net/~meditation/bush-mao.html

>

> You can find the latest biofuel disaster news at -http://home.att.net/~meditation/biofuel-news.html

That is not quite what those studies say. They only show that, using

certain models , ethanol from cellulose (or corn) will not be

economically viable by certain arbitrary dates. And that is assuming

that there are no significant increases in the efficiency of the

process. But of course large increases in efficiency and decreases in

cost are common as processes and products are developed. Everything

from TVs to air travel was very expensive at first.

The question of government subsidies of ethanol (or anything else) is

a separate issue. I agree that the free market should determine

whether an alternative energy source is economically viable;

government should not subsidize ethanol or anything else--including

petroleum, which it routinely does by spending hundreds of billions of

tax dollars to ensure a steady supply of foreign oil.

"Ouroboros_Rex" <its@casual.com> wrote in message

news:ft0mre$p6c$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...

> calderhome@yahoo.com wrote:

>> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/g/a/2008/04/02/cstillwell.DTL&type=printable

>>

>> Fuel or folly?

>>

>> Ethanol and the law of unintended consequences

>>

>> by Cinnamon Stillwell Wednesday, April 2, 2008

>>

>> In the pantheon of well-intentioned governmental policies gone awry,

>> massive ethanol biofuel production may go down as one of the biggest

>> blunders in history. An unholy alliance of environmentalists,

>> agribusiness, biofuel corporations and politicians has been touting

>> ethanol as the cure to all our environmental ills, when in fact it may

>> be doing more harm than good. An array of unintended consequences is

>> wreaking havoc on the economy, food production and, perhaps most

>> ironically, the environment.

>>

>> Biofuels are fuels distilled from plant matter. Ethanol is corn-based,

>> but other common biofuel sources include soybeans, sugar cane and palm

>> oil, an edible vegetable oil. In the search for alternatives to fossil

>> fuels, many countries have turned to biofuels, which has led to a

>> booming business for those involved. In the United States, ethanol is

>> the primary focus and, as a result, corn growers and ethanol producers

>> are subsidized heavily by the government.

>>

>> But it turns out that the use of food for fuel is wrought with

>> difficulties. Corn, or some derivative thereof, is a common ingredient

>> in a variety of packaged food products. So it's only natural that, as

>> it becomes a rarer commodity due to the conflicting demands of biofuel

>> production, the prices of those products will go up.

>

> Nope. There's plenty of nonedible GM corn and plenty of other non-food

> plant species to use. The current price artifacts are temporary.

rex lies again.

"Bill Miller" <bmiller1@vwestdu.com> wrote in message

news:1a322$47f3e3f2$d1aad212$22360@VIAWEST.NET...

>

> <calderhome@yahoo.com> wrote in message

> news:cbee7e55-9b4c-4f4b-827f-a08efe7619ba@s13g2000prd.googlegroups.com...

>>

> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/g/a/2008/04/02/cstillwell.DTL&type=printable

>>

>> Fuel or folly?

>>

>> Ethanol and the law of unintended consequences

>>

>> by Cinnamon Stillwell Wednesday, April 2, 2008

>>

>> In the pantheon of well-intentioned governmental policies gone awry,

>> massive ethanol biofuel production may go down as one of the biggest

>> blunders in history. An unholy alliance of environmentalists,

>> agribusiness, biofuel corporations and politicians has been touting

>> ethanol as the cure to all our environmental ills, when in fact it may

>> be doing more harm than good. An array of unintended consequences is

>> wreaking havoc on the economy, food production and, perhaps most

>> ironically, the environment.

>>

> If either one of the three liberals running for Potus win, you can

> expect the UN well be calling the shots for what we can grow in the US.

> The canidates all want to sign on to LOST ( The Law of The Sea

> Treaty ). There is hidden away in the treaty in fine print that there

> can be repercussions for any nation that pollutes the UNs oceans.

> Everyone knows corn is one of the worse crops you can plant for damage

> to the seas. We should start drilling for gas and oil off our coasts

> before the UN takes over the floor of all the worlds oceans.

>

The LOST treaty is a major thing and no one knows much about it but

restrictions on this country may cause a bit of fury. Congress doesn't do

any homework any more on shit treaties like this. Hell they don't do much

of anything anyway unless it's political.

"calderhome@yahoo.com" <calderhome@yahoo.com> wrote:

>http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/g/a/2008/04/02/cstillwell.DTL&type=printable

>

>Fuel or folly?

>

>Ethanol and the law of unintended consequences

>

>by Cinnamon Stillwell Wednesday, April 2, 2008

>

>In the pantheon of well-intentioned governmental policies gone awry,

>massive ethanol biofuel production may go down as one of the biggest

>blunders in history. An unholy alliance of environmentalists,

>agribusiness, biofuel corporations and politicians has been touting

>ethanol as the cure to all our environmental ills, when in fact it may

>be doing more harm than good.

That is pure bullshit, all of the organizations

that lobbied and organized the industry were grain

farm co-ops and farmer-grain elevator business men.

After 50 years of storage overflowing, and

government payments for not planting millions of

acres, they now are able to sell most of the crops.

Animal feed is in greater supply than ever

before, the dried solids are available as "brewer's

grain".

Only the oil companies lose as a result of

ethanol production, the environment gains because

even the 10 percent in gasoline burns cleaner and

adds octane giving better performance and efficiency.

James wrote:

> "Ouroboros_Rex" <its@casual.com> wrote in message

> news:ft0mre$p6c$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...

>> calderhome@yahoo.com wrote:

>>> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/g/a/2008/04/02/cstillwell.DTL&type=printable

>>>

>>> Fuel or folly?

>>>

>>> Ethanol and the law of unintended consequences

>>>

>>> by Cinnamon Stillwell Wednesday, April 2, 2008

>>>

>>> In the pantheon of well-intentioned governmental policies gone awry,

>>> massive ethanol biofuel production may go down as one of the biggest

>>> blunders in history. An unholy alliance of environmentalists,

>>> agribusiness, biofuel corporations and politicians has been touting

>>> ethanol as the cure to all our environmental ills, when in fact it

>>> may be doing more harm than good. An array of unintended

>>> consequences is wreaking havoc on the economy, food production and,

>>> perhaps most ironically, the environment.

>>>

>>> Biofuels are fuels distilled from plant matter. Ethanol is

>>> corn-based, but other common biofuel sources include soybeans,

>>> sugar cane and palm oil, an edible vegetable oil. In the search for

>>> alternatives to fossil fuels, many countries have turned to

>>> biofuels, which has led to a booming business for those involved.

>>> In the United States, ethanol is the primary focus and, as a

>>> result, corn growers and ethanol producers are subsidized heavily

>>> by the government. But it turns out that the use of food for fuel is

>>> wrought with

>>> difficulties. Corn, or some derivative thereof, is a common

>>> ingredient in a variety of packaged food products. So it's only

>>> natural that, as it becomes a rarer commodity due to the

>>> conflicting demands of biofuel production, the prices of those

>>> products will go up.

>>

>> Nope. There's plenty of nonedible GM corn and plenty of other

>> non-food plant species to use. The current price artifacts are

>> temporary.

>

> rex lies again.

Cite, liar?

calderhome@yahoo.com wrote:

> On Apr 2, 11:29 am, "Ouroboros_Rex" <i...@casual.com> wrote:

>

> "There's plenty of nonedible GM corn and plenty of other non-food

> plant species to use. The current price artifacts are temporary."

> ------------------------------------

> A new study from three agricultural economists at Iowa State

> University with insider information on the latest biofuel technology

> says ethanol made from cellulose will likely NEVER be affordable The

> Federal tax credits for ethanol made from cellulose would have to be

> raised from the current $.51 to $1.55 per gallon, which will be

> unacceptable to Congress and the American public. Switchgrass, crop

> waste, and wood chip biofuel schemes are too expensive to ever work!

Ethanol made from cellulose is not corn ethanol.

Bawana wrote:

> On Apr 2, 3:29 pm, "Ouroboros_Rex" <i...@casual.com> wrote:

>> calderh...@yahoo.com wrote:

>>> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/g/a/2008/04/02/cstill...

>>

>>> Fuel or folly?

>>

>>> Ethanol and the law of unintended consequences

>>

>>> by Cinnamon Stillwell Wednesday, April 2, 2008

>>

>>> In the pantheon of well-intentioned governmental policies gone awry,

>>> massive ethanol biofuel production may go down as one of the biggest

>>> blunders in history. An unholy alliance of environmentalists,

>>> agribusiness, biofuel corporations and politicians has been touting

>>> ethanol as the cure to all our environmental ills, when in fact it

>>> may be doing more harm than good. An array of unintended

>>> consequences is wreaking havoc on the economy, food production and,

>>> perhaps most ironically, the environment.

>>

>>> Biofuels are fuels distilled from plant matter. Ethanol is

>>> corn-based, but other common biofuel sources include soybeans,

>>> sugar cane and palm oil, an edible vegetable oil. In the search for

>>> alternatives to fossil fuels, many countries have turned to

>>> biofuels, which has led to a booming business for those involved.

>>> In the United States, ethanol is the primary focus and, as a

>>> result, corn growers and ethanol producers are subsidized heavily

>>> by the government.

>>

>>> But it turns out that the use of food for fuel is wrought with

>>> difficulties. Corn, or some derivative thereof, is a common

>>> ingredient in a variety of packaged food products. So it's only

>>> natural that, as it becomes a rarer commodity due to the

>>> conflicting demands of biofuel production, the prices of those

>>> products will go up.

>>

>> Nope. There's plenty of nonedible GM corn and plenty of other

>> non-food plant species to use. The current price artifacts are

>> temporary.

>

> Nobody celebrates failure like a lib-turd demonkrap.

> the demonkrap motto:

> Better living through self-delusion.

The usual nothing, from the usual nothing.

In article <ft0mre$p6c$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu>,

"Ouroboros_Rex" <its@casual.com> wrote:

> calderhome@yahoo.com wrote:

> > http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/g/a/2008/04/02/cstillwell.DT

> > L&type=printable

> >

> > Fuel or folly?

> >

> > Ethanol and the law of unintended consequences

> >

> > by Cinnamon Stillwell Wednesday, April 2, 2008

> >

> > In the pantheon of well-intentioned governmental policies gone awry,

> > massive ethanol biofuel production may go down as one of the biggest

> > blunders in history. An unholy alliance of environmentalists,

> > agribusiness, biofuel corporations and politicians has been touting

> > ethanol as the cure to all our environmental ills, when in fact it may

> > be doing more harm than good. An array of unintended consequences is

> > wreaking havoc on the economy, food production and, perhaps most

> > ironically, the environment.

> >

> > Biofuels are fuels distilled from plant matter. Ethanol is corn-based,

> > but other common biofuel sources include soybeans, sugar cane and palm

> > oil, an edible vegetable oil. In the search for alternatives to fossil

> > fuels, many countries have turned to biofuels, which has led to a

> > booming business for those involved. In the United States, ethanol is

> > the primary focus and, as a result, corn growers and ethanol producers

> > are subsidized heavily by the government.

> >

> > But it turns out that the use of food for fuel is wrought with

> > difficulties. Corn, or some derivative thereof, is a common ingredient

> > in a variety of packaged food products. So it's only natural that, as

> > it becomes a rarer commodity due to the conflicting demands of biofuel

> > production, the prices of those products will go up.

>

> Nope. There's plenty of nonedible GM corn and plenty of other non-food

> plant species to use. The current price artifacts are temporary.

Hehehehe. You seem to specialize in being wrong.

In article <ft2pnh$i7j$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu>,

"Ouroboros_Rex" <its@casual.com> wrote:

> The usual nothing, from the usual nothing.

Good job at self-appraisal.

In article <ft2pje$i6s$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu>,

"Ouroboros_Rex" <its@casual.com> wrote:

> James wrote:

> > "Ouroboros_Rex" <its@casual.com> wrote in message

> > news:ft0mre$p6c$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...

> >> calderhome@yahoo.com wrote:

> >>> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/g/a/2008/04/02/cstillwell.

> >>> DTL&type=printable

> >>>

> >>> Fuel or folly?

> >>>

> >>> Ethanol and the law of unintended consequences

> >>>

> >>> by Cinnamon Stillwell Wednesday, April 2, 2008

> >>>

> >>> In the pantheon of well-intentioned governmental policies gone awry,

> >>> massive ethanol biofuel production may go down as one of the biggest

> >>> blunders in history. An unholy alliance of environmentalists,

> >>> agribusiness, biofuel corporations and politicians has been touting

> >>> ethanol as the cure to all our environmental ills, when in fact it

> >>> may be doing more harm than good. An array of unintended

> >>> consequences is wreaking havoc on the economy, food production and,

> >>> perhaps most ironically, the environment.

> >>>

> >>> Biofuels are fuels distilled from plant matter. Ethanol is

> >>> corn-based, but other common biofuel sources include soybeans,

> >>> sugar cane and palm oil, an edible vegetable oil. In the search for

> >>> alternatives to fossil fuels, many countries have turned to

> >>> biofuels, which has led to a booming business for those involved.

> >>> In the United States, ethanol is the primary focus and, as a

> >>> result, corn growers and ethanol producers are subsidized heavily

> >>> by the government. But it turns out that the use of food for fuel is

> >>> wrought with

> >>> difficulties. Corn, or some derivative thereof, is a common

> >>> ingredient in a variety of packaged food products. So it's only

> >>> natural that, as it becomes a rarer commodity due to the

> >>> conflicting demands of biofuel production, the prices of those

> >>> products will go up.

> >>

> >> Nope. There's plenty of nonedible GM corn and plenty of other

> >> non-food plant species to use. The current price artifacts are

> >> temporary.

> >

> > rex lies again.

>

> Cite, liar?

You first, you're the liar that claimed:

"There's plenty of nonedible GM corn and plenty of other non-food

plant species to use. The current price artifacts are temporary."

Prove it.

Snicker.