The other energy scandal: ethanol

Townhall.com ^ | August 28th, 2002 | Michelle Malkin

[apochromat]

I'm not against getting oil from domestic land, by the way. How long would a complete switch-over to domestic supply take, in your estimate? How much would it cost? Wouldn't it be wise to keep external supply lines open and make changes gradually? It could easily take hundreds of years to do it that way. What if your estimates are off by 25-50 percent% or more?

[Black Agnes]

Michelle Malkin ping thread request!

[apochromat]

One good thing about your oil exec estimate is that if we pump oil here, we will more directly appreciate the environmental impact, perhaps. Good idea, I suppose.

[apochromat]

If we suddenly start pumping and refining all our oil inside the country, will that "force" anyone to get something they don't want, in your opinion? Will it "force" them to have something taken away from them?

[Jesse]

"Ethanol is good for our economy, it's good for our air," President Bush asserted earlier this week.

More proof that there is no longer a difference between the parties, and Bush talks like a conservative but acts like Teddy Kennedy on steroids when it comes to supporting big government boondoggles.

[apochromat]

If you have any agreement with the other poster, perhaps you could consider answering my questions to him as if they were addressed to you. They're meant to be open questions, anyway.

[apochromat]

I like to be selective in my criticism of government oversight on industry, so I may direct my efforts where it serves best. The official stance is not owed ignorant criticism, in any case.

[Iowa Granny]

I didn't notice anything in the article you posted regarding MTBE. (Admittedly, I scanned the article I am at work,,, and suppose to be working ;~/)

MTBE's are used as an oxygenate in fuels. MTBE's are a known carcinagen and have been found in drinking water supplies in CA. I believe it was primarily drinking water supplies that used resivors (sp) for storing the water. I cannot document this fact, but it stands to reason. I do not intend to imply that all of CA's drinking water is laced with MTBE.

Ethanol is the cleanest, least expensive alternative oxygenate.

I understand your point about ADM, and it is well taken. However, there is a health related issue that must be acknowledged and addressed.

[realpatriot71]

You are 100% absolutely correct. However, the only reason most of your points are completely valid at this time is that there is no real "ethanol industry or protocol". For instance there isn't enough ethanol producing factories to make it cost effective, and engines are currently not engineered to run on ethanol. There may come a time and place for ethanol, but it's not now, and it shouldn't be forced on anyone.

[bat-boy]

If you truly want to buy from a local farmer, I can guarantee that there are farmers in your area willing to sell to you. As far as beef is concerned, you can legally buy a whole cow, a side (1/2 a cow) or a quarter-half (1/4 a cow), depending on the farmer. Many farmers will only sell quarter-halves if they have another quarter-half buyer. The way we get away with it is to sell the animal "on-the-hoof", which basically means live. Then the customer and farmer go together to the processor (in my area this is a non-state or USDA inspected plant whose specialty is processing game) and the customer tells the butcher how he wants the meat cut. This is perfectly legal because it is not required to have your meat inspected if you are doing it for your personal consumption.

Free range poultry can be bought from farmers off the farm in many states as well. It depends on the state. Let me tell you, if you haven't ever had free range chicken, you're going to be shocked at how different and how much better it tastes.

There is even a way to buy milk straight from the farmer, although, this gets a bit tricky, and many farmers will not do it unless they know you. Farmers can sell milk for "animal purposes" (I forgot the term used), i.e., to feed to an orphaned calf, kid, etc. However, if the authorities find out what the real deal is, then there can be some consequences.

The only way the laws will be changed is when enough people threaten to vote the scum out of office unless the laws are changed. I don't foresee a change though, as the consumer is happy with the way things are now. This is what they have grown up on. They don't know how much more delicious an non-commercial chicken or egg is. They are unfamiliar with grass-fed beef.

There is a "homeland security" arguement against a consolotated food industry. There are actually very few corporate processing facilities. This is because they are so huge. Animals are transported from all areas of the U.S. to these facilities.

Just think of the damage a terrorist could do working in a processing facility. He/she could poison Americans all across the country. Worse yet, if a terrorist destroyed these key processing facilities, it would cause devastation within the U.S.

Who cares though right? As long as the politicians stay in office.

[Victoria Delsoul]

Evening bump.

[Jesse]

The production of ethanol for gasoline additives has been shown to be a net energy loser, and does not result in cleaner burning gasoline.

[apochromat]

Those objections may become trivial and outdated by technology. Even if I agreed with you completely now, it wouldn't change my mind.

[apochromat]

The production of ethanol for gasoline additives has been shown to be a net energy loser

Under current assumptions of energy costs, of course, in some scenario you haven't explained.

... and does not result in cleaner burning gasoline.

That may be correctable, and if you have a car that runs on gas or alcohol, and there's no gas, it won't matter to you.