Skip to comments.The secret, dirty cost of Obama's green power push
Posted on 11/12/2013 5:45:29 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
"................... Even under the government's optimistic projections, the ethanol mandate wasn't going to reduce greenhouse gas right away. And with the model so far off from reality, independent scientists say it's hard to make an argument for ethanol as a global warming policy.
"I'd have to think really hard to come up with a scenario where it's a net positive," said Silvia Secchi, a Southern Illinois University agriculture economist.
She paused a few moments, then added, "I'm stumped."
In June, when Obama gave a major policy speech on reducing greenhouse gas, he didn't mention ethanol. Biofuels in general received a brief, passing reference.
What was once billed as an environmental boon has morphed into a government program to help rural America survive.
"I don't know whether I can make the environmental argument, or the economic argument," Vilsack said in an interview with the AP. "To me, it's an opportunity argument."................"
(Excerpt) Read more at apnews.myway.com ...
Americans are going to have one hell of a mess to clean up once the Kenyan boy is out of the White House. Geez. What were those idiot DemocRAT “voters” thinking?! The promise of free stuff wasn’t worth the destruction of America.
Generally, here in my part of Kentucky, the farmers HATE the ethanol mandates. It really messes up farm machinery that does use Gasoline. And much of that type of machinery is **OLD**, repaired and taken care of with loving hands.
It’s cheaper in the long run to do that than to by new stuff as one of the old farmers here told me. He showed me an old seed drill that had been rebuilt twice and would be good for another five or so years of hard work. Buying new is nice, but he and the others like him remember their grandparents losing so much to the banks back in the depression and they refuse to mortgage anything or buy on credit.
And those who do have to buy formulated feed for some of their herds hate the price increases that the Ethanol mandates have pushed onto the feed market.
With a lib, there are unintended consequences.
they are ALWATS present.
Libs really have no interest in the actual outcomes of the policies they advocate.
As far as they are concerned, once the policy is advocated for and implemented, the goal has been reached.
They are now officially a “good person” for advocating the policy.
Telling them of the failures of that policy is a personal attack on their righteousness and will not be listened to or tolerated.
You think Hillary will clean this up??? Rotflmao.
—thankfully ,this article or a variation is all over the mid-western news media this morning—
—those of us who have been aware of the foolishness of ethanol can fell a bit justified—
—the price per bushel of corn, BTW , for those who don’t pay attention to commodities has gone from $7.00 to below $4.50 over the last few months-—
Even worse for Ethanol’s “green” credentials is that the enviros conveniently forget the nearly one ton of carbon dioxide produced by the yeasts for each ton of ethanol they make.
Shocking maps of the corn belt showing how many more counties are planting corn. ND most affected.
Government, once again, skewing the market with perverse incentives.
I trap that yeast byproduct in home brew as my contribution to reducing atmospheric CO2. I “condition” mine in the bottle.
The whole scam came falling down around the libs&dems necks
like a colombian neck tie.. a winnie flamer..
just hope the wind turbines blow the fumes
Forward.. towards the WH.
Apparently the big ag businesses like ADM love ethanol. Otherwise we wouldn’t see so many farm state politicians of both parties pushing it.
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.