Hidden costs of ethenol

I am remimded of a quote that said, "when otherwise intelligent people
do stupid stuff, there is usually politics involved".

So not only do we pay more for less power in out auto fuel...


http://www.netscape.com/viewstory/20...nd-for-ethanol

cavelamb himself wrote:
I am remimded of a quote that said, "when otherwise intelligent people
do stupid stuff, there is usually politics involved".

So not only do we pay more for less power in out auto fuel...


http://www.netscape.com/viewstory/20...nd-for-ethanol


It's spelled ethanol, not ethenol, babe. Dang non media types, no copy
editing. (tongue-in-cheek mode into low gear)

And while it's true that corn's up a good deal from its 2000 price of
$1.95 a bushel, it's also true that in 1950 corn cost... $2.00 a bushel.

The cost of the corn in a bag of Doritos is 2 cents, so folks howling
about its effect on other consumer products are crying wolf, dear. We
pay less of our income for food than any other consumers on earth and
nobody I've seen lately is in any danger of starving.

Let them brew up their corn ethanol for another year or so until others
start making it out of weeds, leftover winegrapeskins, and other crap
and the Midwestern plants are standing empty. When the price of corn
goes back down to two bucks a bushel once again, don't hold your breath
waiting for cheaper Doritos...that's not the way the system works.

Of course by then we'll "win" the "war" in Iraq and gas will be real
cheap again.

On Jun 25, 9:19 pm, Stella Starr wrote:
cavelamb himself wrote:
I am remimded of a quote that said, "when otherwise intelligent people
do stupid stuff, there is usually politics involved".


It's spelled ethanol, not ethenol, babe. Dang non media types, no copy
editing. (tongue-in-cheek mode into low gear)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It doesn't matter how he spells it, it's still a scam. Were it not
for ADM's lobbyists and massive subsidies provided by your tax
dollars, the whole idea of diluting gasoline with alcohol would fall
flat on its face.

-R.S.Hoover

On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 21:19:36 -0700, Stella Starr
wrote:

cavelamb himself wrote:
I am remimded of a quote that said, "when otherwise intelligent people
do stupid stuff, there is usually politics involved".

So not only do we pay more for less power in out auto fuel...


http://www.netscape.com/viewstory/20...nd-for-ethanol


It's spelled ethanol, not ethenol, babe. Dang non media types, no copy
editing. (tongue-in-cheek mode into low gear)

And while it's true that corn's up a good deal from its 2000 price of
$1.95 a bushel, it's also true that in 1950 corn cost... $2.00 a bushel.

The cost of the corn in a bag of Doritos is 2 cents, so folks howling

The cost of corn in the bag may be two cents, but if the cost of corn
doubles the cost of the Doritos will go up a lot more than another 2
cents. More than likely they will go up by a good 50% even though
about half the cost of them like soft drinks is in the packaging and
handling.


about its effect on other consumer products are crying wolf, dear. We
pay less of our income for food than any other consumers on earth and
nobody I've seen lately is in any danger of starving.

Let them brew up their corn ethanol for another year or so until others
start making it out of weeds, leftover winegrapeskins, and other crap
and the Midwestern plants are standing empty. When the price of corn
goes back down to two bucks a bushel once again, don't hold your breath
waiting for cheaper Doritos...that's not the way the system works.

Of course by then we'll "win" the "war" in Iraq and gas will be real
cheap again.

Ahhhh...you forgot the sarcasm mode on switch :-))

Has anyone figured this out yet? Even if 1 half of all americans
change over
to e-85 ethanal fuel, there isn't enough farm land to produce the corn
that
will be needed. We will once again be looking to an imported fuel
base.
Lou

"Lou" wrote in message
oups.com...
Has anyone figured this out yet? Even if 1 half of all americans
change over
to e-85 ethanal fuel, there isn't enough farm land to produce the corn
that
will be needed. We will once again be looking to an imported fuel
base.
Lou


That's what the "so called" experts claim, but I sure see a lot of farm land
that's not growing anything weeds.

I guess we would all have the right to complain, that increased corn
production would decrease our available assets for emergency landings.

"Lou" wrote in message
oups.com...
Has anyone figured this out yet? Even if 1 half of all americans
change over
to e-85 ethanal fuel, there isn't enough farm land to produce the corn
that
will be needed. We will once again be looking to an imported fuel
base.
Lou

As in everything with a balance, there are two options:
1. Produce more
2. Use less

Considering the world rank of the USA on energy consumption, I'd focus on #2

Rob

On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 03:53:23 -0700, Lou wrote:

Has anyone figured this out yet? Even if 1 half of all americans
change over
to e-85 ethanal fuel, there isn't enough farm land to produce the corn
that
will be needed. We will once again be looking to an imported fuel
base.

It's been publicized but apparently our congress critters missed that.
Even with higher yields of corn and in production we don't have enough
total farm land available to grow enough corn to produce enough
alcohol to support a major switch to alcohol as a fuel. That's the
main reason they talk about switch grass and bio generation of
alcohol. However the Canadian's have it right using hemp which is
easy to grow and gives a much higher yield of Alcohol while consuming
much less energy to grow and process. Again, our government has a
hangup with the word hemp, associating all hemp with the recreational
stuff.
BTW, we already have a 50 cent per gallon tariff on imported ethanol
while we are subsidizing the growing of corn and alcohol processing
plants.

Lou

David Deutsch, Jimmy Carter's Undersecretary of Energy (let's see the
tree-huggers impeach THAT source!), has calculated that ethanol in
gasoline is costing consumers $120 for every barrel of oil it
replaces; with crude selling for under $70 per barrel the only people
smiling about this are the corn growers, the ethanol producers, the
politicians they've bought and people dumb enough to believe just
about anything. I live in Iowa and I'm seeing close-up the ignorant
boosterism that's behind this economically unsustainable scheme.

Stella Starr wrote:

It's spelled ethanol, not ethenol, babe. Dang non media types, no copy
editing. (tongue-in-cheek mode into low gear)

Ya got me again, beautiful.

My software doesn't spell check the subject line - and after 9pm I can't
spell worth a darn.

Oh well, so much for fame and fortune...

Richard