Photos
Blog
NewslettersFood or ethanol?
According to sources on Google, a soon to be released World Bank report says that:
"Biofuels have caused world food prices to increase by 75 percent, according to the findings of an unpublished World Bank report published in The Guardian newspaper on Friday."
"...a senior World Bank economist assessed that contrary to claims by US President George W. Bush, increased demand from India and China has not been the cause of rising food prices."
http://pUVx7kz2Aafp.google.com/article/ALeqM5gz6DCk0CcH1N8kQ8Hyz
The cost increase of using corn to produce ethanol as a gasoline additive is said to be closer to 75 percent rather than the 3 or 4 percent cited by our government. In addition, corn based ethanol reduces mileage somewhere between 15-30 percent. The process for converting garbage into ethanol is still in the research stages.
Should the President roll back his ethanol mandates that were strongly suggested and supported by environmental groups?
- Shadows's blog
- Login to post comments
- 741 reads
I think ethanol should be cut back. With the reduction in miles per gallon and the price of fuel remaining high, we are paying more for each time we fill up.
The main benefit from ethanol is the reduction in pollutants that cause smog. We are not gaining a significant benefit in energy independence, so for most of us, ethanol is a liability.
Cities and states that have a smog problem can legislate ethanol requirements, but why penalize the bulk of the nation with higher prices? Give us our 100% gas back and pump more oil.
Eventually, we will have electric cars and alternative fuels in the near future. But for now, we need gas for the cars we have.
The US might consider copying Brazil and switch to making ethanol from sugar - it would be cheaper, and not impact our food supply so greatly.
We are in a transition period, and what worked for the past 100 years will not work as well in the future. We need to seriously consider developing mass transit in areas like Beaufort County where it is essentially non-existant.
Elida,
The current models for mass transit only work effectively in "tall" cities with commerce centers. They do not work in "widespread" sprawling areas. With all of the resources available there, Los Angeles has never made it work.
Your thoughts on sugar are good, and it goes further. There are many non-food crops that will work and can be grown in very short time cycles on land that is not currently being used for growing food crops. There are many fuel sources and fuel saving technologies that are not being utilized because the oil companies amongst other powers are not allowing it to happen. I have a motorcycle that with a few inexpensive modifications gets nearly 60 mpg and will still reach 140+ mph. If I can do it, any car or bike manufacturer can. There are many answers, we just have to seek them out and demand that they be explored.
I certainly appreciate the constructive comments thus far, but there are several other points to consider in the article, such as the involvement of the World Bank, Administration, and the Supreme Court. Another important issue is the transmittal of electronic data by email and whether unopened email of the government is considered public information that falls under the Freedom of Information Act.
The debunking of the apparent myth about China and India causing the food prices to rise so much is also an important point in the article. I can hardly wait to see the entire World Bank report.
Using sugar cane and garbage based ethanol would certainly be the smartest way to go since they differ in both their composition/properties and economic effect on the food prices. However, until that happens, should we continue to raise the prices of food in order to use inefficient ethanol?
Corn is not the best source of sugar for fermentation to produce ethanol. Sugar content is the key and there are crops, such as sugar cane and sugar beets that have a higher sugar content.
Corn was the choice so far because corn production is plentiful and can be grown anywhere in the US. We have millions of acres where corn can be grown and if the market was suitable, many acres lying fallow could be used. Corn also is the cheapest way to get ethanol.
Even in SC, old fallow fields are prominent including here in Beaufort County and not used. Some are put into tree production, but a lot just lies there not being used. If the corn market was dependably high enough to be an incentive, farmers could use that land again for corn.
Sugar cane grows only in the warmer tropics like south Florida and areas around the equator, but a good market might encourage Cuba, Dominican Republic to increase acreage. Brazil is already growing more cane for ethanol production.
Sugar beets is a relatively small crop and grows in the northern tier of states like the Dakotas.
But for the consumer, we might buy ethanol if the price were right. Even though it gets less miles per gallon, the bottom line is how much in dollars does it cost to get us from point A to B. At the moment, gas is the cheapest fuel.
One link for ethanol production is:
http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/rbs/pub/sep06/ethanol.htm
Good article egret. From what I understand Cellulose based ethanol also burns cleaner than corn based ethanol. I have read that as a result of corn based ethanol be priced at about 4 dollars per gallon, it is the first time in our history that 100 percent of our country's corn production has been used.
But as you alluded to, where is the cost savings or benefit to the consumer, or even to the environment? It reminds me of the involvement of Archer Daniels in ethanol back in the 70s. Too many lobbyists and not enough representatives of the people.
Probably worst of all is the apathy of the people. They are not moving against the high prices of fuel and food. Instead they just sit and complain to each other.
Probably worst of all is the apathy of the people. They are not moving against the high prices of fuel and food. Instead they just sit and complain to each other.
So, tell us what YOU are doing. Sitting and complaining?
Haynesworth, for some reason I expected some sort of personal attack from someone rather than everyone addressing the issues in the article. I hope that you followed the link and read the article, it covers a number of points besides just the ethanol issue.
But if it will result in a better day for you, rest assured that I have already written my Representative, Senators, and also the President of the United States, voicing my opposition to using corn-based ethanol.
Additionally, I have severely curbed my driving and have attempted to use all of the none ethanol gas that I have been able to locate. BTW, it varies from locale to locale. I was up North last week and most of the stations were still selling gasoline without the ethanol additive.
I also make an effort to purchase local vegetables, etc. to avoid the high costs associated with the ethanol production, distribution, etc.
BTW, thanks for copying and reminding me of what I said so that I would be able to accurately respond to your single question.
Haynesworth, for some reason I expected some sort of personal attack from someone rather than everyone addressing the issues in the article. I hope that you followed the link and read the article, it covers a number of points besides just the ethanol issue.
But if it will result in a better day for you, rest assured that I have already written my Representative, Senators, and also the President of the United States, voicing my opposition to using corn-based ethanol.
Additionally, I have severely curbed my driving and have attempted to use all of the none ethanol gas that I have been able to locate. BTW, it varies from locale to locale. I was up North last week and most of the stations were still selling gasoline without the ethanol additive.
I also make an effort to purchase local vegetables, etc. to avoid the high costs associated with the ethanol production, distribution, etc.
BTW, thanks for copying and reminding me of what I said so that I would be able to accurately respond to your single question.
And you are welcome.
I was up North last week and most of the stations were still selling gasoline without the ethanol additive.
My family, who still live in the Main Line of suburban Philadelphia told me recently that all of their gas has been required for some time to contain ethanol to reduce contamination from engine emissions.
Thanks for the info elida. As I stated I was up North last week near Detroit and most of the stations were still selling gasoline without the ethanol additive. On the other extreme, I believe that I heard recently that all of the stations in Florida will be required to convert to ethanol additive gasoline by the beginning of July. It means changing tanks for some of those stations.
As of this morning I read reports that the ethanol is again causing problems for older cars that have rubber parts in their systems. As some might recall, it did the same in the 70s.
The federal mandates are gradual in application and the President has the authority to roll them back. I believe that McCain supports rolling them back.
As of this morning I read reports that the ethanol is again causing problems for older cars that have rubber parts in their systems. As some might recall, it did the same in the 70s.
I'm driving, as my only car, an American car I bought new in September of 1992. I was surprised to learn recently that my favorite gas station in Beaufort has had 10% ethanol in their gas for the past year.
Can't say I remember the ethanol problems of cars in the 1970's - I had newer cars in those years, but I'm glad my 16 year old one now is still going strong. My family up north have two cars about 10 years old, they report no problems with the mandated ethanol in their local gas, their cars are running well.
What are YOU doing about it? Since you're so worried about what others are doing. Probably not contributing anything except to chime in from time to time like you do here.
Do you ever have any ideas of your own, or you just have to follow others and then be critical of them? When's the last time you posted anything of value on here?
on here Rafael. That may have been of value to someone. I can't imagine who though.
I must not have been paying much attention in the last few days because I missed it. I wonder how much trouble he went through so he could "out" me. All he had to do was ask. I am not hiding behind my screen name like some. Stoney is what most people know me as, but it was no secret that my name is Rafael. I guess he wants to start something with me, but all the while hiding behind his screen name like a coward.
Don't you think some of the goofy stuff you post on here will eventually find it's way to potential clients? It's for sure that no regular readers here would hire you.
I don't hide my opinions or who I am. Try to keep up! Everyone I know knows how I feel.
I wonder what kind of a loser spends all his time tracking what I write on here or goes through the trouble of finding out my personal information so he can post it on here.
You'll forgive me if I don't worry too much about your predictions and what you think about me. Won't you?
I, for one, am not "tracking" anything you do. I end up reading your garbage because I read most of the posts on the blog, and you try to present yourself as an expert on every subject under the sun. You must have picked that up from scooter.......if you don't know, you just make it up. If you want me to leave you alone, just stick to the facts or some semblance of the truth. If you make stuff up, I'm going to call you on it. In case you haven't noticed, lately you are the one replying to my posts with some smarta$$ remark that no one other than you thinks is funny.
I didn't have to go through any trouble to learn your "personal" information. It was presented here for everyone to read, and fortunately deleted by admin before it became too widespread. I can't imagine that any business person would take a chance on his pool of potential customers reading the hateful, mean-spirited and antagonistic drivel you post here.
As far as being a loser goes, I will bow to your expertise in that field.
Is that plain enough for you, or do you want me to lay it out in simpler terms?
You're beginning to worry me again. Now that I agree with everything you post I have to be concerned about your well being. The veins on your neck are showing, you might want to change your blood pressure pills, they don't seem to be working.
LOL! Wasn't it Bill Bixby who said, "you wouldn't like me when I'm angry?"
Yes but succumbing to anger is a sign of extreme weakness. That would never do would it,lol. Wouldn't want you looking like Lou Ferrigno in green.
It is amazing how easy it is to identify bloggers by their writing, even after several "name changes." I have heard it referred to as a "familiar rant."
When I was talking about some loser tracking everything I say and going through the trouble of finding out my personal information, I was referring to Haynesworth because, as you said, he has done it. It really makes me curious what he posted and why he would. If you got offended by that, maybe the shoe fits you too...
As far as my comments to your posts, since you will always repost them if no one comments on them, I figure I'd leave you something. That way you won't make us read them again and again.
Funny how you do nothing but pick on, bicker with, offend and try to belittle anyone who does not see things the way you do, but it is always somehow the other person who is being mean or a smart alec. So far in your post, you called me a liar and said I make up stuff, you said I write garbage, called me a smarta$$, hateful, mean-spirited and antagonistic, and that's just one post. Also funny how you accuse me of pretending to be an expert on everything, but aren't you the self appointed authority on everything from painting aluminum to spelling and everything in between? Go re-read what you've written before you start casting stones. I don't take anything you or anyone else says about me on here personal because it is understood that it's all in good fun.
From day one I haven't hidden who I am or my opinions on subjects of substance. I am not ashamed of my views, nor should I be. I can disagree with anyone and still remain friendly and cordial which can't be said for some people on here. However, if someone wants to take shots at me, you can be sure I will fire back. If someone doesn't like that, they shouldn't start with me. Either way, if someone has a real beef with me, I can be easily found. I find it very cowardly to do a hit and run under some fake name just because my opinion differs from his. I do want to know what was said, so that I can know what type of person I am dealing with.
It is truly unfortunate that any "civil" discourse on practically any thread doesn't continue long before the personal attacks, jabs, threats, derisions, etc. begin.....usually by someone who is at a loss for anything else to "contribute."
If this site is reflective of the majority of the community, is it any wonder that problem solving is so difficult and that a few individuals are able to control the direction of the community at large? Keeping the masses bickering so that they are unable to make any headway seems to work in Beaufort and requires very little effort by the "controllers."
No wonder that one intelligent and wealthy developer is able to come to town and take charge of practically everything. I guess that the only thing to be concerned about is whether or not the developer will do what is right for the town.
Since there is obviously little choice in the matter, don't worry, be happy!!! Go ahead! Say something nice.......or nasty.....whatever "floats your boat."
Seeing as how ethanol reduces my mileage from 26-27 mpg to 23-24 mpg AND costs more energy to make than it produces just how exactly is this helping the environment? Cleaner emissions, ok. How about MORE emissions from ethanol producing plants, less efficient cars and starving people? Seeing as how we have a GIANT nuclear reactor about 93 million miles away that produces enough energy to power a solar system (and an entire planets ecosphere) maybe we should be looking at alternative fuels that don't require us to mine, drill, grow, refine or do ANYTHING.
Ethanol sucks and I will go out of my way to avoid the crap. The Exxon on Boundary St doesn't have it and it is my station of choice for fuel now that I make a once a week trip off Lady's Island for everything I need.
Here's a link to a pretty good article about ethanol....what it was supposed to do compared to what it actually does.
http://www.heritage.org/research/energyandenvironment/wm1925.cfm
People need to call and/or write their elected federal representatives as well as the President and EPA. This is given very little attention by the media, yet it is more damaging to our environment and costly to individual families than most of the issues that we hear about constantly.
Everyone should be against the mandates of corn-based ethanol....not good for the environment or the economy.