Posted on 11/03/2006 5:00:49 PM PST by saganite
Unfortunately, it's not a bubble. It's a deliberate plundering of taxpayers by a powerful political interest group. An ethanol plant is a good investment from an individual investor's point of view because of the massive subsidies our government hands out. If not for the subsidies, the whole ethanol industry would collapse overnight. Unfortunately, those subsidies are not going away because of the political power of the corn lobby.
Several more oil rigs are scheduled to go into production before the end of the year (http://tinyurl.com/ybwfh4). In fact if the numbers are correct, there really is no domestic need for the ethanol either. What’s more, we learn that 80% of the CO2 emissions in Brazil come from deforestation, much of which went into the farming of sugar cane (http://tinyurl.com/w5swf).
Every taxpaying voter in California needs to read this article before Tuesday, November 7, 2006.
The First Rapist and others have been on the TV endlessly telling us flat out lies about the "wonders" of ethanol in Brazil.
Creating a multi-billion$ bureaucracy (welfare for the lower-low middle class) to solve any problem has not worked, not once, in the history of any country on earth.
Socialism sucks. Stealth socialism is the worst of the worse. Socializing energy will make it not only more expensive, but will create a shortage of unimaginable proportions. Just ask the (late) Soviet Union...
Ask the Cubans who use horse-drawn automobile hulks for transportation.
Are you guessing or do you know?
In regard to the info on petroleum, this is based upon
expert analysis of the production factors for petroleum
products as opposed to the energy inputs required to produce alternative energy. The statement on solar is based
upon my own personal experience.(I have solar)
How do you do that? It's 10% Fool's Errand all over the place here.
Thought you might be interested in this article. It sounds like ethanol, with all the corn and water used, is a total wash at this point in time.
I think it's going to be a combination of technologies. If nuclear is ignored, we won't come close.
And Brazil is particulary well suited to ethanol production, having the right climate for producing a superior feedstock (compared to corn), sugar cane, that can be produced cheaply on vast swaths of slash and burn former rainforest (ie, at great cost to the environment in the long term). And it still isn't really an economical proposition. I remain highly skeptical of the value of ethanol as a fuel, at least with any currently-known production methods. Otherwise they wouldn't need subsidized corn and subsidies for ethanol production to encourage it.
Algae is probably the best.
"It will be quite a challenge to get our production cost down below $.10 per kilo. But the industry has already driven the cost down from as high as $300 to as low as $.75 - we just need to keep going."
Once we get to that point of production, oil will be none competitive from $55-60 dollars a barrel. Probably even less, if the general public finds interest in being off the middle east pipe.
I believe a little dabbing into biotech, and we could make petro a less interesting source of energy. Personally I'm for a multifaceted way of gaining indepedence,...but truely some of the people's method^^^^ aren't viable economically.
Nickels and dimes.
True, but with 500 years of coal, and what, 30 to 50 of KNOWN oil (estimates are that the world has 250 years, but of course that just really a guesstamate) we have a lot of time.
Just turn the clock back (mentally of course) 100 years to see how far we've come.
Relax, when true economic pressure begins to exert itself, science will come through.
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.