Time to put brakes on biofuels

<p>The unintended consequences are mounting. Cost savings not proven.</p>

<p>WISCONSIN</a> STATE JOURNAL</p>

<p>Increased</a> ethanol production to worsen Gulf of Mexico ?dead zone? (March 10, 2008)</p>

<p>The actual material cost in food products is very very small. The other stuff that goes into the manufacture and distribution of the final food will add significantly to cost to the consumer. </p>

<p>If x= cost of the primary ingredient (flour).
and N= factor for labor, fuel, distribution, packaging, depreciation, overhead</p>

<p>then Final Consumer cost = X + (N)X</p>

<p>Pizza joints are increasing prices 25% because flour and cheese has gone up so much. It's not inconsequential.</p>

<p>Biofuel as a large-scale fuel source has always been a sham.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Biofuel as a large-scale fuel source has always been a sham.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>And all the politicians who have been pushing Ethanol as an alternative energy source should be deeply ashamed, because there is no way they can't have known just how much of a sham it actually was.</p>

<p>There's always a problem when politicians and others overreact to the problem du jour. In the zeal for energy independence and combating whatever the perceived human generated negative effects on 'global warming' are, there can be a push into technologies that might be costly, have side-effects, and might actually be counter-productive to the goal actually sought. Some studies state that bio fuels might result in MORE CO2 emissions than petroleum.</p>

<p>Bio fuels may hold some promise but it seems that more research is warranted before jumping both feet into it.</p>

<p>The lack of NET ethanol benefits is not "news." A Cal Prof and a Cornell Prof have been saying this for a long time.</p>

<p>The only reason ethanol has such political support is that it's a concern in Iowa, home to Caucus #1. Any politician saying the Emperor Has no Clothes would receive less votes than a Write-In candidate.</p>

<p>McCain, was at one time, against the ethanol program. I will admit that I do not know now, to what detail and when or if he is now opposed. </p>

<p>Current "emperor" doesn't care about clothes.</p>

<p>"The ethanol boondoggle is largely a tribute to the political muscle of a single company: agribusiness giant Archer Daniels Midland. In the 1970s, looking for new ways to profit from corn, ADM began pushing ethanol as a fuel additive. By the early 1980s, ADM was producing 175 million gallons of ethanol a year. The company's then-chairman, Dwayne Andreas, struck up a close relationship with Sen. Bob Dole of Kansas, a.k.a. "Senator Ethanol." During the 1992 election, ADM gave $1 million to Dole and his friends in the GOP (compared with $455,000 to the Democrats). In return, Dole helped the company secure billions of dollars in subsidies and tax breaks. In 1995, the conservative Cato Institute, estimating that nearly half of ADM's profits came from products either subsidized or protected by the federal government, called the company "the most prominent recipient of corporate welfare in recent U.S. history."</p>

<p>Today, ADM is the leading producer of ethanol, supplying more than 1 billion gallons of the fuel additive last year. Ethanol is propped up by more than 200 tax breaks and subsidies worth at least $5.5 billion a year. And ADM continues to give back: Since 2000, the company has contributed $3.7 million to state and federal politicians."</p>

<p>This, by the way, is the same Dwayne Andreas who said "There isn't a grain of wheat sold in a free market anywhere in the world, and won't be, if I have anything to say about it." </p>

<p>Just corporate socialists doing what they do best.</p>

<p>I'm sure you'll find Tom Harkin in there too--if you look a little harder.</p>

<p>Republocrats - wouldn't surprise me in the least. Corporate socialists have no particular party allegiance, except winners. That's one of the beauties of one-party rule.</p>

<p>Ethanol has always been DOA. The only people offering as a solution are those who stood to profit from it and people who don't understand the core principles of the energy industry.</p>

<p>I keep reading this thread titled as "Time to put the brakes on bifocals."</p>

<p>Time to get some, more likely...</p>

<p>(pardon the interruption)</p>

<p>
[quote]
"The ethanol boondoggle is largely a tribute to the political muscle of a single company: agribusiness giant Archer Daniels Midland. In the 1970s, looking for new ways to profit from corn, ADM began pushing ethanol as a fuel additive. By the early 1980s, ADM was producing 175 million gallons of ethanol a year. The company's then-chairman, Dwayne Andreas, struck up a close relationship with Sen. Bob Dole of Kansas, a.k.a. "Senator Ethanol." During the 1992 election, ADM gave $1 million to Dole and his friends in the GOP (compared with $455,000 to the Democrats). In return, Dole helped the company secure billions of dollars in subsidies and tax breaks. In 1995, the conservative Cato Institute, estimating that nearly half of ADM's profits came from products either subsidized or protected by the federal government, called the company "the most prominent recipient of corporate welfare in recent U.S. history."</p>

<p>Today, ADM is the leading producer of ethanol, supplying more than 1 billion gallons of the fuel additive last year. Ethanol is propped up by more than 200 tax breaks and subsidies worth at least $5.5 billion a year. And ADM continues to give back: Since 2000, the company has contributed $3.7 million to state and federal politicians."</p>

<p>This, by the way, is the same Dwayne Andreas who said "There isn't a grain of wheat sold in a free market anywhere in the world, and won't be, if I have anything to say about it."</p>

<p>Just corporate socialists doing what they do best.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I haven't felt this sick or disgusted in a long time. This kind of corporate greed is going to be our undoing, even as we obsess over transient issues, like what Obama's pastor, or Geraldine Ferraro has said.</p>

<p>Agreed, PH. It has sickened me to watch the government pretend that they were pursuing an environmentally responsible position, when actually they were lining someone's pockets.</p>

<p>Because there seems to be unanimity across the political spectrum that biofuels are a boondoggle, I say its time to shut thread down.</p>

<p>Blue Cheese: Looks bad, Smells Bad, and in normal circumstances is rotten, but for a select few, Exquisite Heaven.</p>

<p>Every farm state senator worth his re-election has been behind this. Tom Harkin is now the point man given his leadership position. In fact this has been VERY good for farmers so it is working in spades for them and they are not all ADM people. Even the guy with 500 acres of corn in buying a new truck and paying off the debts. The question is how you balance that with other things.</p>

<p>STATEMENT</a> OF CHAIRMAN TOM HARKIN ON ENERGY AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDATIONS | Targeted News Service | Find Articles at BNET.com</p>

<p>Never would have happened without ADM and the "free market". The rest is just "trickle down" for a few, and "gushing up" for the usual cast of characters.</p>

<p>folks:</p>

<p>Why is post #14 so surprising? Ethanol is just a huge wealth transfer to the heartland. It's been known for years.</p>

<p>mini: yes, ADM is suckling big time, but so are its employees, who also happen to be voters in the heartland. Without the ethanol lobby, corn prices would plummet and the workers might have to compete. :)</p>