Posted on 11/28/2007 1:01:39 AM PST by CutePuppy
Claims for Environment, Energy Use Draw Fire; Fighting on the Farm
By LAUREN ETTER
November 28, 2007; Page A1
Little over a year ago, ethanol was winning the hearts and wallets of both Main Street and Wall Street, with promises of greater U.S. energy independence, fewer greenhouse gases and help for the farm economy. Today, the corn-based biofuel is under siege.
In the span of one growing season, ethanol has gone from panacea to pariah in the eyes of some. The critics, which include industries hurt when the price of corn rises, blame ethanol for pushing up food prices, question its environmental bona fides and dispute how much it really helps reduce the need for oil.
A recent study by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development concluded that biofuels "offer a cure [for oil dependence] that is worse than the disease." A National Academy of Sciences study said corn-based ethanol could strain water supplies. The American Lung Association expressed concern about a form of air pollution from burning ethanol in gasoline. Political cartoonists have taken to skewering the fuel for raising the price of food to the world's poor.
Last month, an outside expert advising the United Nations on the "right to food" labeled the use of food crops to make biofuels "a crime against humanity," although the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization later disowned the remark as "regrettable."
The fortunes of many U.S. farmers, farm towns and ethanol companies are tied to corn-based ethanol, of which America is the largest producer. Ethanol is also a cornerstone of President Bush's push to reduce dependence on foreign oil. But the once-booming business has gone in the dumps, with profits squeezed, plans for new plants shelved in certain cases, and stock prices hovering near 52-week lows.
.....
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
It’s not nice to fool Mother Nature. No one can insulate himself from the influence of the marketplace forever. Not even government.
Not forever, but they proved that they can do that for generations.
whoever believes any of this crap is mentally ill.
the reason Wall Street has soured on ethanol
is that the price has dropped from 4 bucks
a gallon, just after the MTBE phaseout,
to 2 bucks a gallon now.
Shhhhh!!! Nobody is allowed to tell Iowa to go get stuffed for another five weeks!
Iowa votes.
Corn wins.
America loses.
“That’s what happens when government “plans” the economy...
That’s what happens when government “plans” the economy...
That’s what happens when government “plans” the economy...
That’s what happens when government “plans” the economy...
That’s what happens when government “plans” the economy...”
People have been making ‘corn squeezins’ for years, and if they were such good fuel, they would have been running the jalopy on ‘em instead of drinking them. (well, the bad batches, anyway...)
"Why would he want to stick his thumb in the eye of Iowa farm interests?" you may ask. To understand the reason, you have to look at what can happen for Thompson in Iowa if he does not.
If Thompson runs the standard Panderpalooza campaign for Iowa, he will finish, at best, third, and probably fourth. This will be seen by all as a further indicator of his general decline and place a nail on the edge of his coffin that will be driven home by the New Hampshire primary soon to follow. By the time he gets to his Southern strength, it may be too late.
But if Thompson comes out strongly against the standard pander package deal in Iowa, his poor showing there will be seen as a result of his Principled Conservative stand against the subsidies and wasteful ethanol policies that Iowans hold near and dear. He will still finish fourth, or maybe fifth, but this will not be seen as an indicator of general decline, but rather an indicator of his commitment to as a Principled Conservative. Thus he will have a much better chance of surviving Iowa and getting to his Southern strength with a campaign intact.
In other words, Fred Thompson can choose to leave Iowa either as The Hapless Candidate in Decline or as The Principled Conservative Willing to Stand Up for What is Right. The former story has already been written by everybody in the MSM and is just waiting to be filed. The latter story could be substituted, and would put Fred Thompson in a much better position.
Furthermore, Thompson could take all the time and money he has budgeted for Iowa and spend it on other races, and have his stand against ethanol and subsidies to fall back on to explain his poor showing. Since time and money are both in short supply, this should be an appealing prospect.
Call it a long ball, a Hail Mary pass, if you will. But it is the best strategy for Fred Thompson and the Principled Conservative position as well. If Fred is going to win this thing, he is going to win it as the Principled Conservative. It is about time he started acting like it.
We could be energy independent utilizing Diesel from Coal. We have single states that alone have more energy potential in coal than Saudi Arabia has in oil. Gag and hog-tie the global warming alarmists and we can get some things done.
You need only talk to an elementary school child to understand they are being brainwashed to believe the anthropogenic global warming hoax. It’s time Americans started acting like Americans again, started innovating and stopped bowing to theories that are the stuff of hippie pipe dreams and not science.
You are absolutely forgetting “granny”! Granny easily beat Jethro in his hotrod in the old truck, utlizing white lightin’. :)
You’re smart, but Fred isn’t. Neither is Hunter when it comes to ethanol. I have no idea what they are thinking.
Why'd y'all think is had such a Southern emphasis?
We do not need to use food supplies to make biofuels. Hemp is easier to process and has many other uses that corn does not.
Despite the fact that men such as Henry Ford, Rudolph Diesel, and subsequent manufacturers of diesel engines saw the future of renewable resource fuels, a political and economic struggle doomed the industry. Manufacturing industrialists made modifications to the diesel engines so they could take advantage of the extremely low prices of the residual, low-grade fuel now offered by the petroleum industry. The petroleum companies wanted control of the fuel supplies in the United States and, despite the benefits of biomass fuel verses the fossil fuels, they moved ahead to eliminate all competition.
One player in the biofuel, paper, textile, as well as many other industries, was hemp. Hemp had been grown as a major product in America since colonial times by such men as George Washington and Thomas Jefferson and has had both governmental and popular support. Hemp’s long history in civilization and the multitude of products that can be derived from this single plant has made it one of the most valuable and sustainable plants in the history of mankind. More importantly to the biofuel industry, hemp provided the biomass that Ford needed for his production of ethanol. He found that 30% hemp seed oil is usable as a high-grade diesel fuel and that it could also be used as a machine lubricant and an engine oil.
In the 1930’s, the industrialists entered the picture. William Randolph Hurst, who produced 90% of the paper in the United States, Secretary of Treasury, Andrew Mellon, who was a major financial backer for the DuPont Company which ha d just patented the chemical necessary to process wood pulp into paper, the Rockefellers, and other “oil barons”, who were developing vast empires from petroleum, all had vested interest in seeing the renewable resources industry derailed, the hemp industry eliminated, and biomass fuels derided. A campaign was begun to discredit hemp. Playing on the racism that existed in America, Hurst used his newspapers to apply the name “marijuana” to hemp. Marijuana is the Mexican word for the hemp plant. This application along with various “objective” articles began to create a fear. By 1937, these industrialists were able to parlay the fear they created into the Marijuana Tax Act. This law was the precursor to the demise of the hemp industry in the United States and the resultant long reaching effect on the biofuel, petroleum and many other industries. Within three years, Ford closed his biofuel plant.
http://www.ybiofuels.org/bio_fuels/history_biofuels.html
At the beginning of World War II, the groundwork for our current perceptions of biofuels was in place. First, the diesel engine had been modified, enabling it to use Diesel #2. Second, the petroleum industry had established a market with very low prices for a residual product. Third, a major biomass industry was being shut down. Corn farmers were unable to organize at that time and provide a potential product to replace hemp as a biomass resource. Finally, industries with immense wealth behind them were acting in concert to push forward their own agenda - that of making more wealth for themselves. It is interesting to note that, during World War II, the United States government launched a slogan campaign, “Hemp for Victory”, to encourage farmers to plant this discredited plant. Hemp made a multitude of indispensable contributions to the war effort. It is also interesting that, during World War II, both the Allies and Nazi Germany utilized biomass fuels in their machines. Despite its use during World War II, biofuels remained in the obscurity to which they had been forced.
This doesn’t even rise to the level of “planning” the economy. It’s more like tampering.
l0l...You speak the truth all the best drivers were the ones running the shine. Can you see Jeff Gordon running shine and whining he needed another round of wedge? heh
Ethanol....the new DDT ..whoda thunk it.....
ANother libtard idea not worth a tinker’s crap..
CHA.....hey man wuz that the baby i just threw out with the bathwater? FAARRRR OWWWWWT man,.
2 bucks? Gas averages $3.39 for Regular in San Diego, CA.
You’re smart, but Fred isn’t. Neither is Hunter when it comes to ethanol. I have no idea what they are thinking.
******************************
Energy Policy
Rep. Hunter (R-CA) voted against the Clean Energy Act of 2007. He also voted for the Gasoline for America’s Security Act of 2005, which allowed for the construction of new oil refineries. Hunter voted in favor of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. He did not vote, however, on the August 2007 New Direction for Energy Independence, National Security, and Consumer Protection Act.
http://www.cfr.org/bios/13302/duncan_hunter.html
I find CFR to be amazingly nonpartisan with some of the stuff I have read from there, considering their . Very strange.
I bet Hunter doesn’t pander to the Greens. And this is exactly what all this alternative fuel talk does, pander to the Greens who hold very little voting power. As far as the Iowans are concerned, Iowa isn’t exactly in the middle of urban scum-land, they can think for themselves:
http://www.smallbiztrends.com/2004countymap-final.gif
Iowa is a pretty nice place.
We do not need to use food supplies to make biofuels. Hemp is easier to process and has many other uses that corn does not.
************************
Really? Are you going to grow hemp in space? Underground? In the sea? Where else would you grow hemp, other then displacing current farmland? You know farmland which produces FOOD!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
