The fallout from our ethanol blunder

The Herald-Mail ^ | 5/4/08 | JAMES H. WARNER

[Dawnsblood]

For a slight increase in output, there is a much greater input of chemicals. The excess chemicals are washed away and a large quantity reaches the sea. Some biologists fear that in the near future these chemicals will increase the dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico in which little, if any, life can be found.

The irony is that we are sitting on an ocean of oil. If Congress, instead of burning food for motorfuel, would allow the exploitation of our own natural resources, the price of gasoline could be brought down to $1.50 per gallon.

This would strengthen the dollar, strengthen the U.S. economy and would bring down the price of food worldwide. A refusal to act, on the other hand, could trigger angry motorists to bring on another tsunami of public opinion such as the one that killed the immigration reform bill last year. For members of Congress, this is a point to consider.

[RightWhale]

The irony is that we are sitting on an ocean of oil.

An ocean in a cube six miles on a side. That's it fo the planet including tar sands, unrecoverable Bakken, Baku, oil shale, oil two miles down under the ocean, everything. The top few feet is the easy good stuff. Everything else is nasty and expensive.

[Ken522]

A refusal to act, on the other hand, could trigger angry motorists to bring on another tsunami of public opinion such as the one that killed the immigration reform bill last year.

Then that "refusal to act" would be a GOOD thing!

[samtheman]

Environmentalism is a religion with absolutely no connection to what is actually good or bad for the “environment”.

Millions, maybe billions, of people will suffer as a result of this latest environmental dogma: ethonal fuel.

Untold damage to the environment will be caused by adherence to this latest missive from the Environmentalists On High.

But none of that matters. Like John Smith brining the golden tablets to humanity from the angel Moroni, environmentalists only need to conjure of a series of words, they are never asked to produce the actual tablets.

And so the world’s peoples suffer, needless animals and plants die, all so that we may conform to the abstract religious nonsense that is environmentalism.

[weezel]

Methane is more abundant on earth then oil. Why we don’t use it instead of trying to make fuel out of corn is beyond me.

http://www.truehealth.org/methane.html

[Enterprise]

"It is a sign of maturity to recognize when our judgment has been bad and to correct it when the evidence presents itself. Congress apparently lacks this maturity."

Lack of maturity and judgment is a requirement for Democrats to serve in Congress.

[patch789]

ethanol,,,, better than exporting
corn that will be converted to ethanol

[Kackikat]

Well said.

[The Great RJ]

If Congress, instead of burning food for motorfuel, would allow the exploitation of our own natural resources, the price of gasoline could be brought down to $1.50 per gallon.

No instead Congress will tax the oil companies more, continue to prevent drilling in the US or the construction of new refineries and raise the gas tax so we don't drive too much. This will push the US economy into a major recession which will somehow be blamed on George Bush.

[rollo tomasi]

I guess the methane lobby does not have enough $$$$$$$$ to rent out enough politicians.

Instead we get shafted by the 54 cent tariff (Per gallon, come on) and 2.5 percent duty of ‘cane fuel that comes from abroad.

[Brilliant]

Anytime the government does anything, it’s a blunder.

[Smokin' Joe]

I saw aome nit on CNN last night who was advocating mandating refineries run at 95%, despite the fact that some of the shutdowns aree to switch from mandated winter blends to mandated summer blends, others are for maintenance, which if not done will likely lead to catastrophic failures and even less refinery capacity...

If the Congress could just suppress the pathological need to appear to be 'doing something', things would run much better.

Instead, they will rip up the rails and proclaim they are preventing trainwrecks.

[Smokin' Joe]

Actually, I believe there is a contingent of dirt-worshippers who would be ecstatic at reducing the human population by 90%, and reducing the majority of the rest to living in paleolithic squalor in order to be in 'harmony' with nature.

(Of course that does not include the 'true believers', who would retain the benefits of technology and be the overlords...)

[Bobkk47]

Why is it that every time liberals come up with a "good" idea, it turns out to be a bad idea?

[samtheman]

Thanks, but it was actually not well said.

There are several minor but annoying typos and careless wording errors.

But obviously you got my meaning. Thanks for your thanks.

[samtheman]

I’m not so sure the dirt-worshippers want so many people dead. They definitely want them reduced to paleolithic squalor. How can they lord it over the masses if the masses are dead? But if the masses are living in paleolithic squalor (I love that phrase, by the way, cudos to you!), then the Environmental Intellectuals can play not-so-Benevolent Dictator to the silly, stupid, bitter everyone else.

[endthematrix]

That’s where Bartertown gets its energy.

[Kackikat]

The person who never makes mistakes never does anything.
Glad someone is on top of things with or without errors..lol

[Smokin' Joe]

Surviving in Paleolithic squalor requires resources and space. It is only since we have become technologically capable that we have been able to feed the multitudes with a very small portion of the population engaged in food production, thus, the inefficiency of a primitive existence demands fewer people using more space in order to be hunter-gatherers. The overlords who retain technology can always be benevolent and bring food to alleviate localized shortfalls.

The numbers I have seen bandied about most often would entail a 90% reduction in world population.

To me, it heralds an unusual mental illness on the part of those who would actually think such a thing is a good idea.

I’m a firm believer in getting humans spread out in the solar system (at a minimum). We do better as a species with a challenge and a frontier to conquer.

[preacher]

http://www.slate.com/id/2122961/