Ethanol Isn’t Green, Isn’t Efficient, and Shouldn’t Be Subsidized

[longknife]

By Burton A. Abrams | Posted: Mon. December 30, 2013,
Also published in The Daily Caller on Fri. December 27, 2013

My new Mercury outboard motor came with the following warning: “It is recommended that only alcohol-free gasoline be used where possible.” Gasoline blended with ethanol, an alcohol, does some nasty things to small motors. It corrodes metal, deteriorates plastic and rubber parts and creates difficulties with starting and operating the motors. Fuel lines have been known to leak, causing obvious dangers to operators. Where’s the Consumer Protection Agency when you need it? Not only won’t the government protect us consumers, it caused the problem.

An interesting piece to read @ Ethanol Isn’t Green, Isn’t Efficient, and Shouldn’t Be Subsidized: Newsroom: The Independent Institute

 

[Mr. H.]

Fuck that shit.

 

[SSDD]

Burning your food for fuel is always a bad idea at its foundation.

 

[kucing]

Ok thank you for the information

 

[Peterf]

Fuck that shit.

What a repulsive activity! I will refrain from following your suggestion.

 

[Mr. H.]

Fuck that shit.

What a repulsive activity! I will refrain from following your suggestion.

LOL. Well, I hammered out a few paragraphs to post then thought "what a useless exercise". Said to myself "fuck it" and deleted it all.

39 million acres of fertile ground wasted. On what? Bullshit ethanol.

People bitch and moan about the U.S. exporting certain grades of crude oil and various distillates.

Do you realize we are now exporting one billion gallons of ethanol each year?

This wasn't the intended purpose of the program when they sold it to us back in the '80s.

It's turned into one huge cash cow for agriculture. What a con job.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

As long as Iowa is the first caucus, ethanol isn't going anywhere.


.

 

[Old Rocks]

I opposed the idea from the get-go. However, one might look at the politicians that support that idea. As long as the corperate farms can make massive donations under the Citizens United decision, the politicians of both parties will support the idiocy as a matter of survival.

 

[Mr. H.]

Sugar rush at ethanol plant fuels fight with Nebraska corn farmers

 

[SSDD]

Seems that another unintended consequence of the ethanol debacle is the possible demise of the monarch butterfly. With the demand for corn for fuel, much substandard land that was overgrown with milkweed has been turned under in order to grow more corn...not for food, but fuel. The monarch butterfly depends heavily on that milkweed.

Shame to drive a species to extinction for nothing more than a bad idea....an idea by the way that even the UN has acknowledged..years to late of course...as usual.

 

[ScienceRocks]

If you want green = bad
If you want a back up in case oil runs out = good

Depends on how you look at it.

 

[daveman]

The production of ethanol is a net energy loss.

Cornell ecologist's study finds that producing ethanol and biodiesel from corn and other crops is not worth the energy | Cornell Chronicle

Turning plants such as corn, soybeans and sunflowers into fuel uses much more energy than the resulting ethanol or biodiesel generates, according to a new Cornell University and University of California-Berkeley study.

"There is just no energy benefit to using plant biomass for liquid fuel," says David Pimentel, professor of ecology and agriculture at Cornell. "These strategies are not sustainable."

Pimentel and Tad W. Patzek, professor of civil and environmental engineering at Berkeley, conducted a detailed analysis of the energy input-yield ratios of producing ethanol from corn, switch grass and wood biomass as well as for producing biodiesel from soybean and sunflower plants. Their report is published in Natural Resources Research (Vol. 14:1, 65-76).

In terms of energy output compared with energy input for ethanol production, the study found that:

• corn requires 29 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced;
• switch grass requires 45 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced; and
• wood biomass requires 57 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced.

--

In assessing inputs, the researchers considered such factors as the energy used in producing the crop (including production of pesticides and fertilizer, running farm machinery and irrigating, grinding and transporting the crop) and in fermenting/distilling the ethanol from the water mix. Although additional costs are incurred, such as federal and state subsidies that are passed on to consumers and the costs associated with environmental pollution or degradation, these figures were not included in the analysis.​

 

[daveman]

Not to mention the disastrous effect corn-for-ethanol has on the Gulf of Mexico:

Dead zone in gulf linked to ethanol production - SFGate

Fuel Fix » Gulf dead zone should be smaller than 2013, tied to ethanol production

 

[Tresha91203]

It eats lawnmower engines, too.

 

[Kosh]

I opposed the idea from the get-go. However, one might look at the politicians that support that idea. As long as the corperate farms can make massive donations under the Citizens United decision, the politicians of both parties will support the idiocy as a matter of survival.

More far left Obama drone propaganda not based on facts..

Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and John Thune (R-S.D.) introduced an amendment backed by the ethanol industry that would eliminate the tax credit but plow most of the savings into other ethanol subsidies.

 

[Kosh]

If you want green = bad
If you want a back up in case oil runs out = good

Depends on how you look at it.

Actually ethanol is part of what the AGW is against, as they claim it contributes to AGW..

So how can it be green if the AGW cult says it is not?

 

[SSDD]

If you want green = bad
If you want a back up in case oil runs out = good

Depends on how you look at it.

No point in driving a species to extinction over a bad idea no matter how good your intentions are. Raptors...butterflies...desert animals...all suffering over green idiot ideas of renewable nirvana.

 

[elektra]

If you want green = bad
If you want a back up in case oil runs out = good

Depends on how you look at it.

If oil runs out it is because ethanol, wind turbines and all types of solar demand and consume more petroleum.

And we have only scratched the surface of the proposed "renewable", projects.

Gluttons for a dream that fails.

 

[Old Rocks]

If you want green = bad
If you want a back up in case oil runs out = good

Depends on how you look at it.

If oil runs out it is because ethanol, wind turbines and all types of solar demand and consume more petroleum.

And we have only scratched the surface of the proposed "renewable", projects.

Gluttons for a dream that fails.

And you are a damned fool, and an ignoramous. Ethenol does, but that is not the idea of 'Greens' as many on this thread have already pointed out. It is the idea of very large agricorps. And their campaign contributions, under the Citizens United, will keep the idea going until that is repealed.

As for the wind turbines and solar, their purpose is to replace the coal fired generators now, and eventually, the natural gas generators. And they take very little petroleum in there construction compared to the amount used for tranportation.

 

[Old Rocks]

If you want green = bad
If you want a back up in case oil runs out = good

Depends on how you look at it.

No point in driving a species to extinction over a bad idea no matter how good your intentions are. Raptors...butterflies...desert animals...all suffering over green idiot ideas of renewable nirvana.

Now you assholes were and are quite willing to drive the raptors to extinction with DDT. The windmills are not going to drive the raptors to extinction, in fact, the roads alongside the sites have higher kill rates on raptors than do the mills. This is just another lie put out by fools like you to support the coal industry. There are more desert animals killed by the four wheeler aficianados than by solar installations.

Don't give me the crap that you care anything about the animals or environment, you 'Conservatives' have too many times said the hell with both in order for a rich man to make even more money.