U.S. Senator Jim Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, will introduce legislation which would offer gas stations to decide whether or not they want to use gas without ethanol at the pump.
A draconian law will soon go into effect which will force everyone to offer gas with ethanol in it, even though many people don't want to put the stuff into their cars and equipment, because of the proven ethanol causes.
Some foolish and ignorant proponents of ethanol, for example, Terry Dietrich, President of American Farmers and Ranchers Insurance, say things like this, "We think it's high time that we quit fighting wars overseas and funding both sides. We've lost enough American soldiers."
This is so stupid as to not even be able to be taken seriously. In other words, all that oil in Afghanistan you mean? Is that why we need ethanol? Demagogues like this don't even attempt to use their brain when making their statements.
Some even pretend the proven higher costs of food coming from pushing ethanol isn't true either. That's an outright lie. Just ask the meat industry if that's what they have found out.
Just one way this happens is through the higher cost of feeding animals, which when we buy their meat, creates higher costs at the supermarket. How hard is that to understand.
Ethanol needs to be allowed to stand on its own, and the subsidies which make it survive need to be removed. Then we'll see if there's really a demand for it or not. I think we already know the answer to that.
Showing posts with label Ethanol Problems. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ethanol Problems. Show all posts
Saturday, July 3, 2010
Friday, May 28, 2010
The Evil of Forced Ethanol
It's unbelievable what America and the radical environmentalists are getting away with. Ethanol is the latest attempt to force Americans to adhere to what can only be called a religion, with their god being the earth and the environment.
To even resist the monster is to be called a name, and that name is now a derisionary "gas purist."
Here's one example:
"Eric “Ric” Foster, the owner of a Gardner gasoline station, doesn’t like ethanol. No, that’s not quite right. He despises the stuff.
"A sign in front of the station alerts motorists that his gas contains no ethanol, and in case you miss it, an electronic sign in the window boasts of the station’s ethanol-free fuel."
The misguided regulations that force ethanol upon Americans is evil People have a right to the type of gas they want to buy, and the government has no place in telling them any different.
There are a growing number of people resisting this forced ethanol policy, and even by the standards of honest researchers, developing the ethanol industry on the back of corn is far worse for the environment than not doing it.
Once the monster that government is becoming puts something into law, only the bold and wise will be able to get a hearing on it, let alone make some real changes.
With so many things happening around us, it's hard to keep up with all this grab for power by the government, but we need to keep up the good fight, and this is really an issue of freedom.
People should be able to put into their cars what they deem the best fuel, and in a number of cars ethanol can damage them. And the damage done to power equipment is well documented.
The government blending the lines between them and industry is called fascism. This is the road we are increasingly traveling on in America, and we need to battle it every step of the way.
To even resist the monster is to be called a name, and that name is now a derisionary "gas purist."
Here's one example:
"Eric “Ric” Foster, the owner of a Gardner gasoline station, doesn’t like ethanol. No, that’s not quite right. He despises the stuff.
"A sign in front of the station alerts motorists that his gas contains no ethanol, and in case you miss it, an electronic sign in the window boasts of the station’s ethanol-free fuel."
The misguided regulations that force ethanol upon Americans is evil People have a right to the type of gas they want to buy, and the government has no place in telling them any different.
There are a growing number of people resisting this forced ethanol policy, and even by the standards of honest researchers, developing the ethanol industry on the back of corn is far worse for the environment than not doing it.
Once the monster that government is becoming puts something into law, only the bold and wise will be able to get a hearing on it, let alone make some real changes.
With so many things happening around us, it's hard to keep up with all this grab for power by the government, but we need to keep up the good fight, and this is really an issue of freedom.
People should be able to put into their cars what they deem the best fuel, and in a number of cars ethanol can damage them. And the damage done to power equipment is well documented.
The government blending the lines between them and industry is called fascism. This is the road we are increasingly traveling on in America, and we need to battle it every step of the way.
Saturday, May 8, 2010
Meat Producers Ask for End to Ethanol Subsidies
Meat producers in America are rightly calling for an end to the subsidies given them by the government in order to misguidedly create ethanol industry.
The American Meat Institute, the National Cattlemen's Beef Assn., the National Chicken Council and the National Turkey Federation call for a level playing field in competition for corn, and they are of course correct.
If the ethanol industry can't survive competitively, it doesn't deserve to survive, and if people reject it as an alternative fuel, than there's no reason for it to be not only forced on people, but also to increase the price of meat as well for consumers.
The ethanol industry is coddled through tariffs on foreign ethanol, as well as receiving the Volumetric Ethanol Excise Tax Credit.
Government interference in any industry should be forbidden, as it eliminates market forces and creates a pseudo industry that can't survive on its own because consumers wouldn't buy it otherwise.
So when the meat industry has to acquire corn feed, they compete against a government entity in the ethanol industry, which acquires it at subsidized prices.
The beef and pork industries have been devastated because of this ignorant initiative that should never have been allowed in the first place, but now that it has, needs to be ended as quickly as possible.
With the economy down and production prices up for the meat industry, they had to take the losses because of the ethanol subsidies because people wouldn't buy meat when it is too expensive for them in tough economic times.
The meat industry estimates it has lost over $13 bilion as a result of higher corn and soybean prices.
Corn prices are over 4 times higher from 2005 to 2009 as the terrible ethanol policies devastated the industry.
The American Meat Institute, the National Cattlemen's Beef Assn., the National Chicken Council and the National Turkey Federation call for a level playing field in competition for corn, and they are of course correct.
If the ethanol industry can't survive competitively, it doesn't deserve to survive, and if people reject it as an alternative fuel, than there's no reason for it to be not only forced on people, but also to increase the price of meat as well for consumers.
The ethanol industry is coddled through tariffs on foreign ethanol, as well as receiving the Volumetric Ethanol Excise Tax Credit.
Government interference in any industry should be forbidden, as it eliminates market forces and creates a pseudo industry that can't survive on its own because consumers wouldn't buy it otherwise.
So when the meat industry has to acquire corn feed, they compete against a government entity in the ethanol industry, which acquires it at subsidized prices.
The beef and pork industries have been devastated because of this ignorant initiative that should never have been allowed in the first place, but now that it has, needs to be ended as quickly as possible.
With the economy down and production prices up for the meat industry, they had to take the losses because of the ethanol subsidies because people wouldn't buy meat when it is too expensive for them in tough economic times.
The meat industry estimates it has lost over $13 bilion as a result of higher corn and soybean prices.
Corn prices are over 4 times higher from 2005 to 2009 as the terrible ethanol policies devastated the industry.
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Oregon Admits Ethanol Damages Engines
Good Ethanol-free Gas Now Available in Oregon
Pressure from consumers (voters) caused Oregon Governor Ted Kulongoski to change Oregon law in order to sell premium gasoline with ethanol blended with it, as outraged consumers rebel against the horrid fuel as it destroys their expensive small engine products.
Now Oregonians will have good gas available for their machines as before only a few scattered stations sold ethanol free gas, and it was prohibitive to get it for many in the state.
All gas stations across the state can now sell good gas, and hopefully this will encourage other states to follow, and get rid of this worthless, tax payer-financed boondoggle that, while promoting some political careers, is devastating to consumers and the environment, in name of, of course, the environment.
This is nothing new, as boat motor owners, chainsaw owners, snowmobile owners, law mower owners, and any small engine machinery owner of any kind have discovered: ethanol is bad gas, and the sooner we get rid of the misguided policy, the better.
What this does is confirm what was always known - but stubbornly and criminally neglected - that ethanol is damaging, and needs to be completely rejected, as the industry can't survive unless as another socialist industry that people simply have no desire to underwrite, and in an alleged free market like the united States, shouldn't have to.
Incredibly, federal authorities and regulators are actually thinking about increasing ethanol blends to 15 percent, which many fear would start to damage some automobiles as well.
Antique autos already suffer from having to use the gas, although in Oregon, that has now changed.
How about some class action lawsuits to destroy this industry forever. Nobody but politicians and greed big business farmers want this to continue, and that's not a good enough reason to destroy poor people through higer food prices because of the artificial industry, and that includes many of the poorest countries in the world, which resulted in food riots because of high prices from the ethanol nonsense.
Good Ethanol-free Gas Now Available in Oregon
Pressure from consumers (voters) caused Oregon Governor Ted Kulongoski to change Oregon law in order to sell premium gasoline with ethanol blended with it, as outraged consumers rebel against the horrid fuel as it destroys their expensive small engine products.
Now Oregonians will have good gas available for their machines as before only a few scattered stations sold ethanol free gas, and it was prohibitive to get it for many in the state.
All gas stations across the state can now sell good gas, and hopefully this will encourage other states to follow, and get rid of this worthless, tax payer-financed boondoggle that, while promoting some political careers, is devastating to consumers and the environment, in name of, of course, the environment.
This is nothing new, as boat motor owners, chainsaw owners, snowmobile owners, law mower owners, and any small engine machinery owner of any kind have discovered: ethanol is bad gas, and the sooner we get rid of the misguided policy, the better.
What this does is confirm what was always known - but stubbornly and criminally neglected - that ethanol is damaging, and needs to be completely rejected, as the industry can't survive unless as another socialist industry that people simply have no desire to underwrite, and in an alleged free market like the united States, shouldn't have to.
Incredibly, federal authorities and regulators are actually thinking about increasing ethanol blends to 15 percent, which many fear would start to damage some automobiles as well.
Antique autos already suffer from having to use the gas, although in Oregon, that has now changed.
How about some class action lawsuits to destroy this industry forever. Nobody but politicians and greed big business farmers want this to continue, and that's not a good enough reason to destroy poor people through higer food prices because of the artificial industry, and that includes many of the poorest countries in the world, which resulted in food riots because of high prices from the ethanol nonsense.
Good Ethanol-free Gas Now Available in Oregon
Sunday, June 21, 2009
Ethanol Will Raise Food Prices, Harm Environment
Ethanol
As usual, the U.S. government is turning a blind eye to the truth and facts, and continues down the disastrous path of subsidizing ethanol, which will continue to cause huge problems in the near and distant future.
The U.S. government's plan to increase its ethanol mandate will mean higher food prices and more harm to the environment, according to an impact study conducted for two groups that oppose the increase.
"We continue to believe the government's excessive support of the mature corn-based ethanol industry is simply wrong, since it means burning food for fuel," spokesman Gary Mickelson of Tyson Foods Inc. of Springdale said in a statement after Bill Lapp, an agricultural analyst, released his study.
"This policy has contributed to higher corn prices, which have led to increased input costs for food makers — including independent livestock producers — and higher food prices for consumers," Mickelson said.
Corn is a major expense to poultry and beef producers, who want to reduce costs. Ethanol is a fuel additive distilled from plants. That distilling is a major market for corn that corn growers want to increase.
The federal government has a mandate that 10 percent of the fuel coming out of commercial gasoline pumps must be ethanol blended into the gasoline. The Environmental Protection Agency is considering a rule to increase that mandate to 15 percent. The government also maintains a tariff of 54 cents a gallon on imported ethanol.
A recent study from the Food and Agriculture Policy Research Institute at the University of Missouri determined approval of 15-percent ethanol blends would increase corn prices by just $0.04 per bushel, ethanol advocates said in response to Lapp's study.
Increasing the ethanol mandate to 15 percent would require planting as much as 111 million acres of corn, according to Lapp's study. Ethanol would use almost half of the corn crop harvested by 2015. The Grocery Manufacturers Association commissioned the study. The U.S. corn acreage in 2008 was about 85 million acres, U.S. Department of Agriculture figures show.
"Corn and soybean meal are major production costs in the poultry industry, representing 47% of the cost of growing a chicken in 2008," Mickelson said. "Tyson's annual corn and soybean meal expenditures almost doubled from fiscal 2006 to fiscal 2008 and ethanol was a significant reason for the increase."
These arguments have been heard before, the pro-ethanol Renewable Fuels Association replied.
"Time and again, American farmers have answered the need for food, feed and renewable fuel," said association President Bob Dinneen in a statement. "Yet, time and again well-heeled groups seeking to derail the expansion of ethanol are trying to pull the wool over our eyes.
"Many will recall last summer's effort to finger ethanol as skyrocketing oil prices, a weak dollar, speculation, droughts, and global demand drove grain and food prices higher," Dinneen's statement said. "At the time, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Texas A&M University , and scores of other reputable analysts found such claims to be biased, overblown and outrageous. Even the Congressional Budget Office has looked at the issue and found that energy prices had 3 times the impact on the rising price of food than was the increased use of ethanol. Despite being thoroughly refuted last summer and lacking credibility on the issue, these groups are back at it again."
The ethanol industry is struggling even at its current 10 percent mandate. The fall in fuel prices from last year's record highs has severely hurt ethanol interests, industry figures show.
Ethanol's chief use in the United States is for a fuel additive. Ethanol in gasoline reduces carbon emissions and the price of gasoline, advocates say. However, ethanol plants are hard-pressed to make a profit when fuel prices are as low as they are now, according to industry figures -- even though gasoline prices remain higher than $2.50 a gallon at the pump.
At least 10 ethanol companies have sought Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the past year, Bloomberg Business News reports. Valero Energy Corp., the nation's largest independent oil refiner, became an ethanol plant owner in April by buying up seven Midwestern ethanol plants for pennies on the dollar compared to the original investment, Associated Press reports.
"You are going to see this become a trend ... especially with the government wanting to go green," Daniel Flynn, an analyst who follows the renewable fuels industry for Chicago-based Alaron Trading, told Associated Press about the Valero buy. "There are a lot of these ethanol plants hanging by a hair. This could be the perfect time for the big companies to step in."
The U.S. Energy Department reported last week that gasoline supplies climbed 3.39 million barrels to 205 million in the week ended June 12, the largest increase since Jan. 16, Bloomberg reported.
"If you're not eating that much hamburger, you're not using as much Hamburger Helper," Peyton Feltus, president of Randolph Risk Management in Dallas, told Bloomberg. "Until demand shows a sustainable increase, we can't hold these prices up" for ethanol, he said.
Ethanol advocates received another setback earlier this month when a U.S. House panel allowed the federal Environmental Protection Agency to take a wider look at the commodity's environmental impact.
The House Appropriations Committee defeated, 29-30, an amendment to bar the Environmental Protection Agency from using so-called indirect land-use change when measuring greenhouse gases from biofuels, Reuters news service reported.
The United States is the world's major supplier of corn. Critics of ethanol claim that the environment is damaged as other nations have to put more land into farming to produce food as more U.S. corn goes to ethanol. The legislation would allow the EPA to study the question and determine if this increase in farm acreage worldwide offsets or at least mitigates ethanol's environmental benefit.
"There is a huge negative effect here," said Rep. Jo Ann Emerson, R-Missouri, who said an unfair EPA rule "could stop U.S. ethanol production in its tracks."
Scale of Consumption
Corn can produce about 200 gallons of ethanol per acre. If all the corn acreage in the United States were converted to fuel production with corn ethanol, the nation could produce 10 billion gallons of ethanol, the equivalent of about 8 billion gallons of gasoline per year, or about half a million barrels per day. The U.S. consumed about 20 million barrels of crude per day in 2007.
Ethanol
As usual, the U.S. government is turning a blind eye to the truth and facts, and continues down the disastrous path of subsidizing ethanol, which will continue to cause huge problems in the near and distant future.
The U.S. government's plan to increase its ethanol mandate will mean higher food prices and more harm to the environment, according to an impact study conducted for two groups that oppose the increase.
"We continue to believe the government's excessive support of the mature corn-based ethanol industry is simply wrong, since it means burning food for fuel," spokesman Gary Mickelson of Tyson Foods Inc. of Springdale said in a statement after Bill Lapp, an agricultural analyst, released his study.
"This policy has contributed to higher corn prices, which have led to increased input costs for food makers — including independent livestock producers — and higher food prices for consumers," Mickelson said.
Corn is a major expense to poultry and beef producers, who want to reduce costs. Ethanol is a fuel additive distilled from plants. That distilling is a major market for corn that corn growers want to increase.
The federal government has a mandate that 10 percent of the fuel coming out of commercial gasoline pumps must be ethanol blended into the gasoline. The Environmental Protection Agency is considering a rule to increase that mandate to 15 percent. The government also maintains a tariff of 54 cents a gallon on imported ethanol.
A recent study from the Food and Agriculture Policy Research Institute at the University of Missouri determined approval of 15-percent ethanol blends would increase corn prices by just $0.04 per bushel, ethanol advocates said in response to Lapp's study.
Increasing the ethanol mandate to 15 percent would require planting as much as 111 million acres of corn, according to Lapp's study. Ethanol would use almost half of the corn crop harvested by 2015. The Grocery Manufacturers Association commissioned the study. The U.S. corn acreage in 2008 was about 85 million acres, U.S. Department of Agriculture figures show.
"Corn and soybean meal are major production costs in the poultry industry, representing 47% of the cost of growing a chicken in 2008," Mickelson said. "Tyson's annual corn and soybean meal expenditures almost doubled from fiscal 2006 to fiscal 2008 and ethanol was a significant reason for the increase."
These arguments have been heard before, the pro-ethanol Renewable Fuels Association replied.
"Time and again, American farmers have answered the need for food, feed and renewable fuel," said association President Bob Dinneen in a statement. "Yet, time and again well-heeled groups seeking to derail the expansion of ethanol are trying to pull the wool over our eyes.
"Many will recall last summer's effort to finger ethanol as skyrocketing oil prices, a weak dollar, speculation, droughts, and global demand drove grain and food prices higher," Dinneen's statement said. "At the time, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Texas A&M University , and scores of other reputable analysts found such claims to be biased, overblown and outrageous. Even the Congressional Budget Office has looked at the issue and found that energy prices had 3 times the impact on the rising price of food than was the increased use of ethanol. Despite being thoroughly refuted last summer and lacking credibility on the issue, these groups are back at it again."
The ethanol industry is struggling even at its current 10 percent mandate. The fall in fuel prices from last year's record highs has severely hurt ethanol interests, industry figures show.
Ethanol's chief use in the United States is for a fuel additive. Ethanol in gasoline reduces carbon emissions and the price of gasoline, advocates say. However, ethanol plants are hard-pressed to make a profit when fuel prices are as low as they are now, according to industry figures -- even though gasoline prices remain higher than $2.50 a gallon at the pump.
At least 10 ethanol companies have sought Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the past year, Bloomberg Business News reports. Valero Energy Corp., the nation's largest independent oil refiner, became an ethanol plant owner in April by buying up seven Midwestern ethanol plants for pennies on the dollar compared to the original investment, Associated Press reports.
"You are going to see this become a trend ... especially with the government wanting to go green," Daniel Flynn, an analyst who follows the renewable fuels industry for Chicago-based Alaron Trading, told Associated Press about the Valero buy. "There are a lot of these ethanol plants hanging by a hair. This could be the perfect time for the big companies to step in."
The U.S. Energy Department reported last week that gasoline supplies climbed 3.39 million barrels to 205 million in the week ended June 12, the largest increase since Jan. 16, Bloomberg reported.
"If you're not eating that much hamburger, you're not using as much Hamburger Helper," Peyton Feltus, president of Randolph Risk Management in Dallas, told Bloomberg. "Until demand shows a sustainable increase, we can't hold these prices up" for ethanol, he said.
Ethanol advocates received another setback earlier this month when a U.S. House panel allowed the federal Environmental Protection Agency to take a wider look at the commodity's environmental impact.
The House Appropriations Committee defeated, 29-30, an amendment to bar the Environmental Protection Agency from using so-called indirect land-use change when measuring greenhouse gases from biofuels, Reuters news service reported.
The United States is the world's major supplier of corn. Critics of ethanol claim that the environment is damaged as other nations have to put more land into farming to produce food as more U.S. corn goes to ethanol. The legislation would allow the EPA to study the question and determine if this increase in farm acreage worldwide offsets or at least mitigates ethanol's environmental benefit.
"There is a huge negative effect here," said Rep. Jo Ann Emerson, R-Missouri, who said an unfair EPA rule "could stop U.S. ethanol production in its tracks."
Scale of Consumption
Corn can produce about 200 gallons of ethanol per acre. If all the corn acreage in the United States were converted to fuel production with corn ethanol, the nation could produce 10 billion gallons of ethanol, the equivalent of about 8 billion gallons of gasoline per year, or about half a million barrels per day. The U.S. consumed about 20 million barrels of crude per day in 2007.
Ethanol
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Ethanol News | EPA Report Says Ethanol Harder on Climate than Gasoline - Politicians Throw Fit
Ethanol News
There is so much proof that the ethanol debacle needs to end, that even the report by the EPA that ethanol is worse on the environment than gasoline hasn't stopped politicians trying to get taxpayer dollars into their states from thowing a tantrum.
We’ve entered another ugly battle in the ethanol wars. The EPA released an analysis last month purporting that corn-based ethanol is actually worse for the climate than gasoline on a lifecycle basis, and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) released a ruling that will effectively exclude corn-based ethanol from California’s Renewable Fuels Standard for that reason.
The ethanol industry and its supporters are livid (who cares). House Agriculture Chairman Collin Peterson (D-MN), a longtime ethanol supporter, threw a fit during a recent hearing and now is threatening to block climate legislation over the new rules. "I don't care,” he exclaimed during a hearing over EPA’s draft rule, “Even if you fix this. I don't trust anybody anymore -- I’ve had it." Ethanol opponents are cheering the agencies' decisions and urging them to look at ethanol under worst-case scenarios.
What is sad about this spat is that while everyone is arguing over whether ethanol is bad, no one is talking about how to make it better. The worst impacts of ethanol occur far from Iowa or Washington in the forests that are burned down to respond to added demand for cropland.
Deforestation results in almost 20 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, and it will not be solved through tired finger pointing. This problem is hard but solvable if we focus on the systemic drivers of slash-and-burn agriculture.
A quick primer on the latest wrinkle from the EPA and CARB: Both reached damning conclusions about the impact of ethanol based on complex economic modeling, but the basic logic behind their analysis is simple:
• Using farmland for ethanol diverts land from being used for food production, driving up price and demand
• Higher prices and demand encourage farmers in the developing world to plant more crops
• Developing world farmers clear and burn forests so they can plant more crops
• Clearing forest for cropland releases a tremendous amount of greenhouse gas
• Thus, devoting cropland to ethanol production leads to increases in greenhouse gas emissions
The ethanol industry and its supporters don’t dispute this logic, but claim two problems with the agencies’ approach: (1) The science behind this economic modeling is too new and imprecise, and (2) biofuels are being held to a much tougher standard than other climate solutions. Their opponents hold that the science is sound, and that other low-carbon technologies simply don't have these massive "indirect land-use" problems.
Yet this debate is just so much fiddling while Rome (or maybe Indonesia) burns. The crux of the problem is not in how we measure the impact of ethanol, it is that developing world farmers clear and burn forests so they can plant more crops. Ethanol is just one of the pressures that speed the disastrous destruction of these forests. The rest is just an accounting exercise.
Farmers in the developing world burn forests because it is the most economical, and often only, choice they have. They often can’t afford fertilizers, equipment or high-yield seeds. They have limited access to informational tools like education, soil tests and precision agriculture technology that would allow them to produce more crops in the same place. Without these resources, the only choice is to find new land.
Moreover, there is little or no barrier to slash-and-burn agriculture. Logging roads often give farmers access to virgin forests. Not enough forests are protected, and where they are, many governments lack the resources or the will to enforce conservation laws.
The solutions to these problems are not easy, but models exist. Technology transfer and economic development programs can increase crop yields and reduce the real costs of agricultural technology. A global agreement on REDD (reduced emissions from deforestation and degradation) could protect forests and provide payments from a global trust fund as an alternative to chopping trees down.
In order to reduce the lifecycle impact of ethanol, the industry needs to do more than cry foul on these regulations. It needs to be engaged in finding solutions to reduce the pressure to clear land for agriculture. A forward-thinking producer would be lobbying for global forest protection and working with partners in the agricultural industry to support technology transfer to the rural poor.
Meanwhile, ethanol's detractors need to admit that producers can't bear this burden alone, and that failing to compromise with such a politically powerful industry will lead only to delay and more poorly designed policies.
Here's a modest proposal: Congress lets the ethanol industry off the hook for its indirect upstream effects, and the industry agrees that some of its massive subsidies be diverted to programs that protect forests and give farmers options beyond burning them down. Putting more resources toward these programs will not only protect forests from the indirect effects of ethanol, but also the threats of logging, development or other future pressures on agricultural growth.
We will see many more of these fights in the coming years as industries, activists and policymakers argue over who has to bear the burden for indirect, unanticipated environmental and social damages. We need a systemic approach that tackles the problems on the ground, instead of shifting the blame around.
Noam Ross is a senior analyst at GreenOrder, an LRN Company. GreenOrder is a strategy and management consulting firm that has helped leading companies turn sustainability into business value since 2000.
Of course there aren't any climate problems in the first place, and to listen to Ross attempt to apply logic, confusion and reason to the made-up crisis, just shows how far many will go when decisions and conclusions take money out of their greedy pockets.
Ethanol News
There is so much proof that the ethanol debacle needs to end, that even the report by the EPA that ethanol is worse on the environment than gasoline hasn't stopped politicians trying to get taxpayer dollars into their states from thowing a tantrum.
We’ve entered another ugly battle in the ethanol wars. The EPA released an analysis last month purporting that corn-based ethanol is actually worse for the climate than gasoline on a lifecycle basis, and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) released a ruling that will effectively exclude corn-based ethanol from California’s Renewable Fuels Standard for that reason.
The ethanol industry and its supporters are livid (who cares). House Agriculture Chairman Collin Peterson (D-MN), a longtime ethanol supporter, threw a fit during a recent hearing and now is threatening to block climate legislation over the new rules. "I don't care,” he exclaimed during a hearing over EPA’s draft rule, “Even if you fix this. I don't trust anybody anymore -- I’ve had it." Ethanol opponents are cheering the agencies' decisions and urging them to look at ethanol under worst-case scenarios.
What is sad about this spat is that while everyone is arguing over whether ethanol is bad, no one is talking about how to make it better. The worst impacts of ethanol occur far from Iowa or Washington in the forests that are burned down to respond to added demand for cropland.
Deforestation results in almost 20 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, and it will not be solved through tired finger pointing. This problem is hard but solvable if we focus on the systemic drivers of slash-and-burn agriculture.
A quick primer on the latest wrinkle from the EPA and CARB: Both reached damning conclusions about the impact of ethanol based on complex economic modeling, but the basic logic behind their analysis is simple:
• Using farmland for ethanol diverts land from being used for food production, driving up price and demand
• Higher prices and demand encourage farmers in the developing world to plant more crops
• Developing world farmers clear and burn forests so they can plant more crops
• Clearing forest for cropland releases a tremendous amount of greenhouse gas
• Thus, devoting cropland to ethanol production leads to increases in greenhouse gas emissions
The ethanol industry and its supporters don’t dispute this logic, but claim two problems with the agencies’ approach: (1) The science behind this economic modeling is too new and imprecise, and (2) biofuels are being held to a much tougher standard than other climate solutions. Their opponents hold that the science is sound, and that other low-carbon technologies simply don't have these massive "indirect land-use" problems.
Yet this debate is just so much fiddling while Rome (or maybe Indonesia) burns. The crux of the problem is not in how we measure the impact of ethanol, it is that developing world farmers clear and burn forests so they can plant more crops. Ethanol is just one of the pressures that speed the disastrous destruction of these forests. The rest is just an accounting exercise.
Farmers in the developing world burn forests because it is the most economical, and often only, choice they have. They often can’t afford fertilizers, equipment or high-yield seeds. They have limited access to informational tools like education, soil tests and precision agriculture technology that would allow them to produce more crops in the same place. Without these resources, the only choice is to find new land.
Moreover, there is little or no barrier to slash-and-burn agriculture. Logging roads often give farmers access to virgin forests. Not enough forests are protected, and where they are, many governments lack the resources or the will to enforce conservation laws.
The solutions to these problems are not easy, but models exist. Technology transfer and economic development programs can increase crop yields and reduce the real costs of agricultural technology. A global agreement on REDD (reduced emissions from deforestation and degradation) could protect forests and provide payments from a global trust fund as an alternative to chopping trees down.
In order to reduce the lifecycle impact of ethanol, the industry needs to do more than cry foul on these regulations. It needs to be engaged in finding solutions to reduce the pressure to clear land for agriculture. A forward-thinking producer would be lobbying for global forest protection and working with partners in the agricultural industry to support technology transfer to the rural poor.
Meanwhile, ethanol's detractors need to admit that producers can't bear this burden alone, and that failing to compromise with such a politically powerful industry will lead only to delay and more poorly designed policies.
Here's a modest proposal: Congress lets the ethanol industry off the hook for its indirect upstream effects, and the industry agrees that some of its massive subsidies be diverted to programs that protect forests and give farmers options beyond burning them down. Putting more resources toward these programs will not only protect forests from the indirect effects of ethanol, but also the threats of logging, development or other future pressures on agricultural growth.
We will see many more of these fights in the coming years as industries, activists and policymakers argue over who has to bear the burden for indirect, unanticipated environmental and social damages. We need a systemic approach that tackles the problems on the ground, instead of shifting the blame around.
Noam Ross is a senior analyst at GreenOrder, an LRN Company. GreenOrder is a strategy and management consulting firm that has helped leading companies turn sustainability into business value since 2000.
Of course there aren't any climate problems in the first place, and to listen to Ross attempt to apply logic, confusion and reason to the made-up crisis, just shows how far many will go when decisions and conclusions take money out of their greedy pockets.
Ethanol News
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Ethonal: Ethanol Terrible Investment
Remember just a couple years ago when everyone was asking if ethanol was a risky investment? Well, we've got that answer in spades, as company after company falters and most companies with their primary focus on ethanol teetering on the brink of bankruptcy or already in it.
Even giant Archer Daniels Midland got clobbered with huge losses, even though they performed well in other areas to enjoy one of the few profitable quarters among that sector. That was in spite of their investment in ethanol and the ethanol industry, not because of it.
Anyone who has invested in ethanol stock is sorry they did it, along with ethanol companies created to benefit off the back of taxpayers funding. The flex fuel is a disaster, and whether someone worships at the altar of renewable fuels or not, they have to admit the future is not only grim, but impossible to successfully navigate if ethanol - whether it's corn based or cellulosic - is the source looked for in the renewable fuels sector.
Not only is ethanol have huge inputs that affect the environment, but as an alternative fuel is a disaster, with a number of studies showing it's going to cost far more per gallon than gasoline, than originally expected.
There really is no market for ethanol, and as far as small engine power equipment goes, it continues to damage them, even though those trying to force the ethanol industry on the rest of us aren't willing to admit it, even though manufacturers and small engine repair shops continue to say they're filled with snowmobiles, generators, chainsaws, and other small engine equipment using ethanol as part of their fuel.
When you also consider the mulit-millions used to build ethanol plants and artificially create ethanol producers, you see that taxpayer money could have been used for something much better than this misguided fiasco.
Add the current economic problems to the mix and it's even a great disaster. Ethanol plant construction is largely on hold; you can't send it through pipelines to get it cheaply to where it is needed; and in the name of the dubious idea of generating jobs build upon an illusion is worse than not doing it in the first place.
Producing ethanol as far as all costs concerned was vastly underrated, and the effect of using so much acreage to grow corn on the artificial prices that couldn't hold up, caused food prices to surge and riots around the world as people struggled to survive because of corn being used to feed the environmental nuts dream of nirvana rather than people.
So now most ethanol companies are a disaster; ethanol stocks have plummeted; ethanol as an investment is ridiculous; and it damages small engines and even some cars using e85 in their vehicles. And we're obsessed with ethenol why? Because people are trying to get the public eye off the billions of barrels of oil on American land and off its coastlines. They're pretending we've entered into a crisis period when in fact billions of barrels of oil are available for consumption.
No matter how the ethanol marketing campaign is arranged, you can't hide the horrid idea it has become, nor the huge, negative impact its having all around. Many original ethanol proponents have change their minds about its viability as a biofuel because of its challenges that aren't able to be solved.
Every aspect of it has failed, and yet because of the powerful farm lobby, which has nothing to do with small farmers but rather billion dollar companies getting tax breaks to pursue the stupid idea, we continue to waste huge amounts of money and time for something doomed to fail.
The ethanol industry is dead on arrival. Let's just admit it, start to open up our land and coastlines to the hundreds of billion of barrels of oil available, and then slowly look for real, viable alternatives.
The fear generated from marketing ethanol that we are somehow some type of dire need to find alternative fuels is an outright lie. The results of the debacle show that fear-induced initiatives never work, as it isn't thought through, but enacted for political expediency.
Ethanol is a poor and misguided investment of time and money. We need to move on, knowing we aren't in a hurry, and there's plenty of oil for decades to come we can access and produce instead of investing in the losing ethanol industry.
Even giant Archer Daniels Midland got clobbered with huge losses, even though they performed well in other areas to enjoy one of the few profitable quarters among that sector. That was in spite of their investment in ethanol and the ethanol industry, not because of it.
Anyone who has invested in ethanol stock is sorry they did it, along with ethanol companies created to benefit off the back of taxpayers funding. The flex fuel is a disaster, and whether someone worships at the altar of renewable fuels or not, they have to admit the future is not only grim, but impossible to successfully navigate if ethanol - whether it's corn based or cellulosic - is the source looked for in the renewable fuels sector.
Not only is ethanol have huge inputs that affect the environment, but as an alternative fuel is a disaster, with a number of studies showing it's going to cost far more per gallon than gasoline, than originally expected.
There really is no market for ethanol, and as far as small engine power equipment goes, it continues to damage them, even though those trying to force the ethanol industry on the rest of us aren't willing to admit it, even though manufacturers and small engine repair shops continue to say they're filled with snowmobiles, generators, chainsaws, and other small engine equipment using ethanol as part of their fuel.
When you also consider the mulit-millions used to build ethanol plants and artificially create ethanol producers, you see that taxpayer money could have been used for something much better than this misguided fiasco.
Add the current economic problems to the mix and it's even a great disaster. Ethanol plant construction is largely on hold; you can't send it through pipelines to get it cheaply to where it is needed; and in the name of the dubious idea of generating jobs build upon an illusion is worse than not doing it in the first place.
Producing ethanol as far as all costs concerned was vastly underrated, and the effect of using so much acreage to grow corn on the artificial prices that couldn't hold up, caused food prices to surge and riots around the world as people struggled to survive because of corn being used to feed the environmental nuts dream of nirvana rather than people.
So now most ethanol companies are a disaster; ethanol stocks have plummeted; ethanol as an investment is ridiculous; and it damages small engines and even some cars using e85 in their vehicles. And we're obsessed with ethenol why? Because people are trying to get the public eye off the billions of barrels of oil on American land and off its coastlines. They're pretending we've entered into a crisis period when in fact billions of barrels of oil are available for consumption.
No matter how the ethanol marketing campaign is arranged, you can't hide the horrid idea it has become, nor the huge, negative impact its having all around. Many original ethanol proponents have change their minds about its viability as a biofuel because of its challenges that aren't able to be solved.
Every aspect of it has failed, and yet because of the powerful farm lobby, which has nothing to do with small farmers but rather billion dollar companies getting tax breaks to pursue the stupid idea, we continue to waste huge amounts of money and time for something doomed to fail.
The ethanol industry is dead on arrival. Let's just admit it, start to open up our land and coastlines to the hundreds of billion of barrels of oil available, and then slowly look for real, viable alternatives.
The fear generated from marketing ethanol that we are somehow some type of dire need to find alternative fuels is an outright lie. The results of the debacle show that fear-induced initiatives never work, as it isn't thought through, but enacted for political expediency.
Ethanol is a poor and misguided investment of time and money. We need to move on, knowing we aren't in a hurry, and there's plenty of oil for decades to come we can access and produce instead of investing in the losing ethanol industry.
Sunday, February 1, 2009
Ethanol | Greater Ohio Ethanol
Greater Ohio Ethanol - Another Reason to Abandon the Ethanol Debacle
The failure of the ethanol initiative is again unveiled as the Greater Ohio Ethanol company can't find a buyer that could justify the price and debt the company is attempting to command and owes.
Costs for the ethanol plant were an astronomical $150 million, without anything but a pathetic government mandate to force ethanol as a biofuel on the public. Even with taxpayer subsidies the biofuel can't even come close to producing a profit.
Unless Greater Ohio Ethanol is basically given away, it's not even worth the trouble. Even then it's doubtful it would be worth the headache of an inevitable shutdown. If someone takes this responsibility on, they deserve what they get, as it's been a losing proposition from the beginning.
While the ethanol plants' creditors are obviously trying to patch up as much damage to their investment as they can, they have absolutely no foundation to stand on, the reason deal after deal has been turned down.
So far two companies have made bids for Greater Ohio Ethanol, but they've both been rejected. Both companies have stakes in Greater Ohio Ethanol, as Paladin Capital Group of Washington, D.C. provided the equity to build the Lima plant, and NextGen Ethanol owns two of the ethanol plants currently operating.
Bills continue to mount in spite of the failed bids, and it'll keep getting worse the longer the bankruptcy proceedings last, as they're costly as well. There are still operational costs at the ethanol plant, along with construction bills that have yet to be paid. What a mess the misguided ethanol industry has become, and Greater Ohio Ethanol is a cover story to emphasize the debacle.
With creditors anxiously looking on, they've filed a motion to convert the Chapter 11 bankruptcy to a Chapter 7, as those unsecured debtors are in a secondary position, and probably will receive nothing under the Chapter 11. At this time a sale of the company would only benefit the senior, secured lenders. Of course the unsecured debtors knew this when they signed on, so it's nothing but their own fault for taking the risk.
Lima, Ohio is finding out the hard way, along with much of the midwest, that ethanol as a business is basically fools gold, and it's going to remain that way. The Greater Ohio Ethanol company, along with the numerous other ethanol companies, is a narrative showing ethanol as a biofuel needs to be abandoned as a viable alternative. The numbers just don't add up, and it's a waste of billions in taxpayer dollars.
The failure of the ethanol initiative is again unveiled as the Greater Ohio Ethanol company can't find a buyer that could justify the price and debt the company is attempting to command and owes.
Costs for the ethanol plant were an astronomical $150 million, without anything but a pathetic government mandate to force ethanol as a biofuel on the public. Even with taxpayer subsidies the biofuel can't even come close to producing a profit.
Unless Greater Ohio Ethanol is basically given away, it's not even worth the trouble. Even then it's doubtful it would be worth the headache of an inevitable shutdown. If someone takes this responsibility on, they deserve what they get, as it's been a losing proposition from the beginning.
While the ethanol plants' creditors are obviously trying to patch up as much damage to their investment as they can, they have absolutely no foundation to stand on, the reason deal after deal has been turned down.
So far two companies have made bids for Greater Ohio Ethanol, but they've both been rejected. Both companies have stakes in Greater Ohio Ethanol, as Paladin Capital Group of Washington, D.C. provided the equity to build the Lima plant, and NextGen Ethanol owns two of the ethanol plants currently operating.
Bills continue to mount in spite of the failed bids, and it'll keep getting worse the longer the bankruptcy proceedings last, as they're costly as well. There are still operational costs at the ethanol plant, along with construction bills that have yet to be paid. What a mess the misguided ethanol industry has become, and Greater Ohio Ethanol is a cover story to emphasize the debacle.
With creditors anxiously looking on, they've filed a motion to convert the Chapter 11 bankruptcy to a Chapter 7, as those unsecured debtors are in a secondary position, and probably will receive nothing under the Chapter 11. At this time a sale of the company would only benefit the senior, secured lenders. Of course the unsecured debtors knew this when they signed on, so it's nothing but their own fault for taking the risk.
Lima, Ohio is finding out the hard way, along with much of the midwest, that ethanol as a business is basically fools gold, and it's going to remain that way. The Greater Ohio Ethanol company, along with the numerous other ethanol companies, is a narrative showing ethanol as a biofuel needs to be abandoned as a viable alternative. The numbers just don't add up, and it's a waste of billions in taxpayer dollars.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Ethanol: "Show Me Ethanol" Conflict of Interest
"Show Me Ethanol" in Missouri is in a battle over conflict of interest, as politicians in the state own shares in the company, potentially giving the ethanol plant it's operating for the purpose of making money for state legislaters.
State Treasurer Sarah Steelman has a policy in place to keep the taxpayer subsidized company from benefiting those in governmental power.
Some are trying to pressure Steelman to ease up on the policy, but she's right - there shouldn't be any politician anywhere that benefits from a government subsidy program, as it's really another form of insider trading, no matter how you look at it.
Show Me Ethanol is scheduled to open this spring, and had received an initial nod from Steelman that they had conditional approval to receive loans from banks at rates below the market rate.
That condition was that the ethanol plant had to comply with the conflict of interest policy, where no single investor in the company could have ties to statewide elected officials or anyone related to them.
In the case of Show Me Ethanol, that's not the case, as a number of Missouri politians or their family members have invested in the ethanol company, including John Quinn, his wife, Mary, Andy Blunt, and Lesley Graves.
Supposedly other ethanol companies have been reluctant to work under Sarah Steelman's strict policy, but that seems to be a condemnation rather than a pressure on Steelman. They don't understand that by rejecting the policy, they're admitting they are indeed looking for favors from politicians, and that those politicians would benefit from it.
This underscores the problem of the ethanol industry, which can't survive without being artificially propped up by taxpayer money and tax credits, or low interest loans.
Include with this the tremendous amount of damage it does to some cars and power equipment like snowmobiles, chainsaws and many others, we need to simply get this idea off the table, along with the thought that this is a viable alternative energy source.
Ethanol really isn't a business, it's a socialist program designed to placate those who are earth worshippers and hate the thought of digging for the billions of barrels of oil on American soil, which would allow fuel for decades ahead.
Ethanol supporters are in denial of this, and so push forward this disastrous program that costs people so much, let alone the damage it does to the environment.
As an investment - as the failed ethanol companies around the country show - ethanol sucks, the alternative gas mix is terrible, and it's far less effective than regular gasoline.
What it's becoming is a political, socialist business, not a free market business. That's why the biofuel is failing, along with the many ethanol companies.
While the government should be involved in any type of business, if they are going to be, at least it should be something that isn't destructive like ethanol is, and something that has a future.
Ethanol as a business and alternative fuel isn't one of them. The taxpayer money is being wasted as the powerful farm and corn growers lobbies think of only themselves at the expense of the rest of us.
End the low paying loans, taxpayer subsidies and tax credits to farmers. If the business is a legitimate one, it would be able to stand on its own. Ethanol businesses can't.
State Treasurer Sarah Steelman has a policy in place to keep the taxpayer subsidized company from benefiting those in governmental power.
Some are trying to pressure Steelman to ease up on the policy, but she's right - there shouldn't be any politician anywhere that benefits from a government subsidy program, as it's really another form of insider trading, no matter how you look at it.
Show Me Ethanol is scheduled to open this spring, and had received an initial nod from Steelman that they had conditional approval to receive loans from banks at rates below the market rate.
That condition was that the ethanol plant had to comply with the conflict of interest policy, where no single investor in the company could have ties to statewide elected officials or anyone related to them.
In the case of Show Me Ethanol, that's not the case, as a number of Missouri politians or their family members have invested in the ethanol company, including John Quinn, his wife, Mary, Andy Blunt, and Lesley Graves.
Supposedly other ethanol companies have been reluctant to work under Sarah Steelman's strict policy, but that seems to be a condemnation rather than a pressure on Steelman. They don't understand that by rejecting the policy, they're admitting they are indeed looking for favors from politicians, and that those politicians would benefit from it.
This underscores the problem of the ethanol industry, which can't survive without being artificially propped up by taxpayer money and tax credits, or low interest loans.
Include with this the tremendous amount of damage it does to some cars and power equipment like snowmobiles, chainsaws and many others, we need to simply get this idea off the table, along with the thought that this is a viable alternative energy source.
Ethanol really isn't a business, it's a socialist program designed to placate those who are earth worshippers and hate the thought of digging for the billions of barrels of oil on American soil, which would allow fuel for decades ahead.
Ethanol supporters are in denial of this, and so push forward this disastrous program that costs people so much, let alone the damage it does to the environment.
As an investment - as the failed ethanol companies around the country show - ethanol sucks, the alternative gas mix is terrible, and it's far less effective than regular gasoline.
What it's becoming is a political, socialist business, not a free market business. That's why the biofuel is failing, along with the many ethanol companies.
While the government should be involved in any type of business, if they are going to be, at least it should be something that isn't destructive like ethanol is, and something that has a future.
Ethanol as a business and alternative fuel isn't one of them. The taxpayer money is being wasted as the powerful farm and corn growers lobbies think of only themselves at the expense of the rest of us.
End the low paying loans, taxpayer subsidies and tax credits to farmers. If the business is a legitimate one, it would be able to stand on its own. Ethanol businesses can't.
Saturday, January 17, 2009
Ethanol Problems Continue to Pressure Abandoning the Industry
Ethanol is becoming an increasingly controversial fuel source and problem, as the taxpayer subsidy is the only reason it can even be seriously considered as an alternative to regular gasoline.
The effect of ethanol on small engines has been a disaster, and yet proponents continue to ignore that and push for even higher levels of the mix in order to try to save the propped-up industry.
So far the basic standard has been E10, but even at that level it's harmful to owners of equipment with small engines,
With the cold weather this year, snowmobile owners have had a great opportunity to enjoy the outdoors, but the harm done by ethynol to small engines have brought them to the repair shop more often than not. Repair shop workers have said they're filled with machines waiting to be fixed because of the damage done from ethanol-ruined engines.
Other products used that are always are ruined in the repair shops at this time are snowblowers and chainsaws. Fears are the bad gas will cause even more harm in the biofuel disaster, and end up not only hurting equipment, but people as well. The danger is very real.
In the summer months all the usual power equipment we use like ATVs, lawnmowers and boats, among others, have the same survival challenge, as the engines face the same problems of their winter counterparts.
Along with starting and running problems, ethanol can also eat away at parts of the engine, effectively destroying them.
The two major problems beyond that, are the environment and food prices, which are impacted negatively from ethanol, especially corn-based ethanol. But even cellulosic ethanol won't be any better, and it'll be much more expensive, raising food prices even higher.
A recent study said oil would have to go to a price level of $233 a barrel in order for ethanol to break even.
The ethanol hoax and scam needs to be ended and put to rest. There are already numerous uprising against the misguided plan, and petitions are being signed and recommendations being made to stop the folly.
One politician even recently said that the reason we have to keep going with ethanol is because we've spent so much money on it already. That's plain nuts! You don't keep spending money in order to justify bad policies. It makes no sense at all.
Other than catering to the rich farm lobby, there's nothing good in pursuing the ethanol fiasco. The idea that jobs are being created is a fantasy. Sure you can get the loans and put construction workers together to build a plant. But like they're finding out, it's been a cruel joke on those that were given false hopes; especially the rural areas.
Outdoor equipment companies rightly assert that ethanol backers don't give an honest account fo the dangers and problems consumers will and do experience from the harmful effects of the biofuel.
Even if this weren't difficult times, ethanol would be a complete disaster, but when include the extensive damage to the equipment of people, potential bodily harm, cost of repairs, environmental inputs and higher costs of food, it's cruel to destroy people's lives continuing on with the harmful ethanol initiative.
What's the best way to protect your equipment? Don't put ethanol in them in the first place. All you'll get are more problems and headaches, along with potentially dangerous situations.
The effect of ethanol on small engines has been a disaster, and yet proponents continue to ignore that and push for even higher levels of the mix in order to try to save the propped-up industry.
So far the basic standard has been E10, but even at that level it's harmful to owners of equipment with small engines,
With the cold weather this year, snowmobile owners have had a great opportunity to enjoy the outdoors, but the harm done by ethynol to small engines have brought them to the repair shop more often than not. Repair shop workers have said they're filled with machines waiting to be fixed because of the damage done from ethanol-ruined engines.
Other products used that are always are ruined in the repair shops at this time are snowblowers and chainsaws. Fears are the bad gas will cause even more harm in the biofuel disaster, and end up not only hurting equipment, but people as well. The danger is very real.
In the summer months all the usual power equipment we use like ATVs, lawnmowers and boats, among others, have the same survival challenge, as the engines face the same problems of their winter counterparts.
Along with starting and running problems, ethanol can also eat away at parts of the engine, effectively destroying them.
The two major problems beyond that, are the environment and food prices, which are impacted negatively from ethanol, especially corn-based ethanol. But even cellulosic ethanol won't be any better, and it'll be much more expensive, raising food prices even higher.
A recent study said oil would have to go to a price level of $233 a barrel in order for ethanol to break even.
The ethanol hoax and scam needs to be ended and put to rest. There are already numerous uprising against the misguided plan, and petitions are being signed and recommendations being made to stop the folly.
One politician even recently said that the reason we have to keep going with ethanol is because we've spent so much money on it already. That's plain nuts! You don't keep spending money in order to justify bad policies. It makes no sense at all.
Other than catering to the rich farm lobby, there's nothing good in pursuing the ethanol fiasco. The idea that jobs are being created is a fantasy. Sure you can get the loans and put construction workers together to build a plant. But like they're finding out, it's been a cruel joke on those that were given false hopes; especially the rural areas.
Outdoor equipment companies rightly assert that ethanol backers don't give an honest account fo the dangers and problems consumers will and do experience from the harmful effects of the biofuel.
Even if this weren't difficult times, ethanol would be a complete disaster, but when include the extensive damage to the equipment of people, potential bodily harm, cost of repairs, environmental inputs and higher costs of food, it's cruel to destroy people's lives continuing on with the harmful ethanol initiative.
What's the best way to protect your equipment? Don't put ethanol in them in the first place. All you'll get are more problems and headaches, along with potentially dangerous situations.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Many Reasons to Drop the Ethanol Debacle
"New" ethanol to face crunch time under a Chu DOE
"Steven Chu, Obama's pick for the head of the Department of Energy, is a steadfast supporter of next-generation biofuels such as cellulosic ethanol, expected to be made from the tough woody bits of crops like grasses and fast growing trees as well as plant and timber waste.
"But next-generation biofuels are no quick fix. They are more expensive than gasoline, a problem that was tricky when oil hit $147 a barrel over the summer, but even more difficult now as it trades under $50 a barrel."
Why the Ethanol Mandate is a Joke and a Crime
Shawn McCambridge, senior grains analyst for Prudential-Bache, said capacity could dip below the mandate because the economy will make politicians unwilling to enforce penalties or push for more ethanol at the expense of consumers.
NSW Farmers question lift in mandatory ethanol targets
The NSW Farmers’ Association supports the availability of ethanol blended petrol at service stations throughout NSW, but it believes that this should be determined by market forces, not Government intervention by mandating the percentage of ethanol in petrol.
The Real Future of Ethanol
A state fund that helps North Dakota ethanol plants is expected to run out of money this month.
Ethanol isn't the Answer
Going to ethanol was a great decision for the Brazilians – they got off of foreign oil and, as luck would have it, created a greener fuel which only became important recently. But that doesn’t mean that we can do the same. It’s good that we began to look at other countries to see what they do well, but we need to understand differences between countries, too. Here, we should have known that ethanol wasn’t right for us. If we want energy independence and a greener fuel, we need to look at what else America has to offer.
Ethanol the Killer
Governments worldwide are tempering their drive for biofuel use after a surge in production increased land clearance in Latin America and Asia and reduced food production in some regions. In July, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development estimated wheat and corn prices may rise as much as 7 percent in the next decade because of greater U.S. and European production of alternative fuels.
Ethanol is Worst Biofuel Option
Ethanol-based biofuels will irreversibly damage human health, wildlife, water supply and land use than current fossil fuels ... warns an expert.
"Steven Chu, Obama's pick for the head of the Department of Energy, is a steadfast supporter of next-generation biofuels such as cellulosic ethanol, expected to be made from the tough woody bits of crops like grasses and fast growing trees as well as plant and timber waste.
"But next-generation biofuels are no quick fix. They are more expensive than gasoline, a problem that was tricky when oil hit $147 a barrel over the summer, but even more difficult now as it trades under $50 a barrel."
Why the Ethanol Mandate is a Joke and a Crime
Shawn McCambridge, senior grains analyst for Prudential-Bache, said capacity could dip below the mandate because the economy will make politicians unwilling to enforce penalties or push for more ethanol at the expense of consumers.
NSW Farmers question lift in mandatory ethanol targets
The NSW Farmers’ Association supports the availability of ethanol blended petrol at service stations throughout NSW, but it believes that this should be determined by market forces, not Government intervention by mandating the percentage of ethanol in petrol.
The Real Future of Ethanol
A state fund that helps North Dakota ethanol plants is expected to run out of money this month.
Ethanol isn't the Answer
Going to ethanol was a great decision for the Brazilians – they got off of foreign oil and, as luck would have it, created a greener fuel which only became important recently. But that doesn’t mean that we can do the same. It’s good that we began to look at other countries to see what they do well, but we need to understand differences between countries, too. Here, we should have known that ethanol wasn’t right for us. If we want energy independence and a greener fuel, we need to look at what else America has to offer.
Ethanol the Killer
Governments worldwide are tempering their drive for biofuel use after a surge in production increased land clearance in Latin America and Asia and reduced food production in some regions. In July, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development estimated wheat and corn prices may rise as much as 7 percent in the next decade because of greater U.S. and European production of alternative fuels.
Ethanol is Worst Biofuel Option
Ethanol-based biofuels will irreversibly damage human health, wildlife, water supply and land use than current fossil fuels ... warns an expert.
Unrealistic Ethanol Subsidies Should be Dropped in Minnesota
With their darling biofuel project - corn-based ethanol - continuing to prove a disaster, many states are having to reevaluate their commitment and cut back on funding.
Minnesota is one of those states, as Governor Tim Pawlenty will have to make a key decision on how much the state is able to commit to with a projected $5.2 billion budget deficit facing him.
The problem for Minnesota is they hailed the dubious industry as a savior of Minnesota farmers and could face a huge backlash as that assertion and ploy comes back to haunt them.
Last year Minnesota paid out above $15 million to ethanol plants in subsidies, and its going to be hard to justify continuing that in the current economic climate.
All states need to take a hard look at the problem and get rid of this subsidy and misguided effort to produce a biofuel that experts all around say isn't viable and does more harm than good.
Minnesota is one of those states, as Governor Tim Pawlenty will have to make a key decision on how much the state is able to commit to with a projected $5.2 billion budget deficit facing him.
The problem for Minnesota is they hailed the dubious industry as a savior of Minnesota farmers and could face a huge backlash as that assertion and ploy comes back to haunt them.
Last year Minnesota paid out above $15 million to ethanol plants in subsidies, and its going to be hard to justify continuing that in the current economic climate.
All states need to take a hard look at the problem and get rid of this subsidy and misguided effort to produce a biofuel that experts all around say isn't viable and does more harm than good.
Monday, November 10, 2008
Pacific Ethanol Performance Underscores Ethanol Debacle
The performance of Pacific Ethanol (PEIX) in the third quarter underscores the debacle that the ethanol industry is in the United States.
Losses for the company widened by an extraordinary amount, surging to $54.9 million, or 98 cents a share, in contrast to the same quarter last year where losses were at $4.8 million.
This happened while revenue increased to $184 million, up from $118.1 million last year. Analysts were looking for revenue to reach $218.6 million. The 98 cents a share was also far higher than the 16 cents a share analysts expected.
It's time to end government subsidies and end the ethanol fiasco in the U.S. Even with subsidies the industry isn't viable, and saying cellulosic ethanol is the answer is wrong as well, as it costs far more to produce than the corn-based ethanol we're now producing.
Losses for the company widened by an extraordinary amount, surging to $54.9 million, or 98 cents a share, in contrast to the same quarter last year where losses were at $4.8 million.
This happened while revenue increased to $184 million, up from $118.1 million last year. Analysts were looking for revenue to reach $218.6 million. The 98 cents a share was also far higher than the 16 cents a share analysts expected.
It's time to end government subsidies and end the ethanol fiasco in the U.S. Even with subsidies the industry isn't viable, and saying cellulosic ethanol is the answer is wrong as well, as it costs far more to produce than the corn-based ethanol we're now producing.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
So much for change! Obama to follow same failed ethanol policy as Bush
We now see the first step in change Obama will perform in his new administration, he will keep the failed ethanol policy of President Bush in place. Wait! Change? What's this?
It's politics as usual in Washington, and things aren't going to change in spite of this being the most "important" election in decades.
Obama has already confirmed this through his announcement via his campaign senior energy adviser Heather Zichal, who recently said concerning Obama's policy for ethanol: "Obama recognizes how important the renewable and biofuels industry is to creating jobs and meeting our goal of reducing dependence on foreign oil. He's fully committed to it and sees tremendous value in the renewable fuels standard and continuing down this path."
Yawn. I guess the food riots will continue around the world, and feed prices rise as we continue along this disastrous path.
Even though the idea of cellulosic ethanol was offered up as the eventual future of the biofuel, the truth about it at this time is it costs about twice as much to produce as corn-based ethanol, and it's many years away from being ready for use, if it ever is.
When subsidies and tariffs can't even make an industry succeed, it's far past time to change directions and admit mistakes. To continue to pour billions down this rabbit hole is irresponsible at best.
One major reason for Obama is his home state of Illinois is the second-largest producer of ethanol, and he also was rewarded by Iowa on his presidential run. He wouldn't dare to the right thing by ending this travesty, as he would pay for it in four years.
Business as usual in Washington.
It's politics as usual in Washington, and things aren't going to change in spite of this being the most "important" election in decades.
Obama has already confirmed this through his announcement via his campaign senior energy adviser Heather Zichal, who recently said concerning Obama's policy for ethanol: "Obama recognizes how important the renewable and biofuels industry is to creating jobs and meeting our goal of reducing dependence on foreign oil. He's fully committed to it and sees tremendous value in the renewable fuels standard and continuing down this path."
Yawn. I guess the food riots will continue around the world, and feed prices rise as we continue along this disastrous path.
Even though the idea of cellulosic ethanol was offered up as the eventual future of the biofuel, the truth about it at this time is it costs about twice as much to produce as corn-based ethanol, and it's many years away from being ready for use, if it ever is.
When subsidies and tariffs can't even make an industry succeed, it's far past time to change directions and admit mistakes. To continue to pour billions down this rabbit hole is irresponsible at best.
One major reason for Obama is his home state of Illinois is the second-largest producer of ethanol, and he also was rewarded by Iowa on his presidential run. He wouldn't dare to the right thing by ending this travesty, as he would pay for it in four years.
Business as usual in Washington.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
VeraSun Energy Corp. May be Close to Declaring Bankruptcy
It's far past time to end the taxpayer subsidizing of the ethanol industry in America, as another big ethanol company is on the verge of declaring bankruptcy.
This time its VeraSun Energy Corp., based in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, which is close to declaring bankruptcy. The share price on Wednesday closed at a pathetic 49 cents a share, as they, along with many other ethanol companies, are quickly becoming insolvent.
As usual with government-sponsored companies, the management is horrible, and strategies employed with an eye toward being bailed out regardless of decisions or the marketplace.
When companies aren't allowed to fail, like in the current financial climate, all it does is regard terribly run companies with a safety mechanism that doesn't belong there.
In the past industries and companies were allowed to fail in order that the best-run companies emerge with the best products and services at the best price.
The foolishness of ethanol in America simply needs to be dropped and the market left to decide which way it wants to go. Most Americans want to drill for the proven reserves of billions of barrels of oil while we work on legitimate energy alternatives. Ethanol isn't one of them.
Update: VeraSun Files
This time its VeraSun Energy Corp., based in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, which is close to declaring bankruptcy. The share price on Wednesday closed at a pathetic 49 cents a share, as they, along with many other ethanol companies, are quickly becoming insolvent.
As usual with government-sponsored companies, the management is horrible, and strategies employed with an eye toward being bailed out regardless of decisions or the marketplace.
When companies aren't allowed to fail, like in the current financial climate, all it does is regard terribly run companies with a safety mechanism that doesn't belong there.
In the past industries and companies were allowed to fail in order that the best-run companies emerge with the best products and services at the best price.
The foolishness of ethanol in America simply needs to be dropped and the market left to decide which way it wants to go. Most Americans want to drill for the proven reserves of billions of barrels of oil while we work on legitimate energy alternatives. Ethanol isn't one of them.
Update: VeraSun Files
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Greater Ohio Ethanol Latest to File Bankruptcy in Ongoing Ethanol Debacle
Another company bites the dust in the continuing exposure of the ethanol debacle in the U.S. The latest casualty is the Greater Ohio Ethanol company, which has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.
As usual with the ethanol hoax, people let their emotions get in the way of facts, and they make terrible decisions. Unfortunately it's creating a false hope in many communities across the country which were counting on it to make a difference in where they live.
In this particular case, the amount of water needed to make the fuel was seriously miscalculated by half of what is being used, and that has pretty much destroyed the project and the hopes of the people that were counting on it. This is becoming the story across numerous communities in the U.S.
While chapter 11 bankruptcy is initiated in order to attempt to reorganize, the sounds of this is another company has foolishly entered into the ethanol fray without the understanding of the high costs of ethanol.
As usual with the ethanol hoax, people let their emotions get in the way of facts, and they make terrible decisions. Unfortunately it's creating a false hope in many communities across the country which were counting on it to make a difference in where they live.
In this particular case, the amount of water needed to make the fuel was seriously miscalculated by half of what is being used, and that has pretty much destroyed the project and the hopes of the people that were counting on it. This is becoming the story across numerous communities in the U.S.
While chapter 11 bankruptcy is initiated in order to attempt to reorganize, the sounds of this is another company has foolishly entered into the ethanol fray without the understanding of the high costs of ethanol.
Friday, October 10, 2008
Weak Economy Exposes Ethanol Subsidy Debacle
Towns across America ran hard to partake in another government scheme to buy votes through offering subsidies for the production of ethanol.
Many buildings and plans are now sitting empty and idle, while a growing number are declaring bankruptcy, or are already in the process.
While mainstream media is in love with the industry, and refuses to point out the horrid effects the misguided effort has or will produce, that doesn't stop the realities of it from happening.
Many goofy liberals even tout it as patriotic. In reality it's not patriotic, it's idiotic. Not only that, even though it's increasingly apparent that it's a terrible idea and will have more negative impacts than positive, it's now becoming close to being embraced as a religion by liberals, and they are clinging to it like it's their god, rather than the folly it is.
The weak global and U.S. economy has exposed the weakness of the debacle, and that's the reason so many ethanol projects are shuttering their doors.
The reason it's faltering is that people couldn't care less about it, and are starting to understand the extraordinary costs related to forcing upon them.
A large number of these attempts have partly come from taxpayer money as well as subsidies, and that has in many cases been money thrown down the drain. It's past time for the government to be involved with this stupidity and let the market decide what type of fuel and energy they want to use.
For now, in America we have billions of barrels of oil available for use. We need to drill and retrieve that for our fuel before we do more stupid things that not only cost poor people around the world from soaring food costs, but the damage the pursuit is doing to the environment.
What's worse about all this is many small towns joined the bandwagon, hoping it would produce some jobs for the communities. Now they have empty buildings and ruined dreams as the fantasy of ethanol being some type of savior to the community has come crashing to the ground.
Yet in the midst of the government-induced economic crisis we're now in, they still hold to devastating and disastrous ideas that interfere in markets and destroy the lives of unsuspecting people.
Related Stories:
U.S. Ethanol Subsidies to Keep Food Prices High Everywhere
More Reasons to Drop the Ethanol Nonsense
Ethanol no more than Heavily Subsidized Cash Crop Supported by Powerful Lobby
Corn Farmers in Denial over Taking Responsibility for High Cost of Food
Is U.S. Government Responding Quickly Enough to the Ethanol Disaster?
Tensions Continue Building as Ethanol Continues to Cause Increase in Corn, Food Prices
Many buildings and plans are now sitting empty and idle, while a growing number are declaring bankruptcy, or are already in the process.
While mainstream media is in love with the industry, and refuses to point out the horrid effects the misguided effort has or will produce, that doesn't stop the realities of it from happening.
Many goofy liberals even tout it as patriotic. In reality it's not patriotic, it's idiotic. Not only that, even though it's increasingly apparent that it's a terrible idea and will have more negative impacts than positive, it's now becoming close to being embraced as a religion by liberals, and they are clinging to it like it's their god, rather than the folly it is.
The weak global and U.S. economy has exposed the weakness of the debacle, and that's the reason so many ethanol projects are shuttering their doors.
The reason it's faltering is that people couldn't care less about it, and are starting to understand the extraordinary costs related to forcing upon them.
A large number of these attempts have partly come from taxpayer money as well as subsidies, and that has in many cases been money thrown down the drain. It's past time for the government to be involved with this stupidity and let the market decide what type of fuel and energy they want to use.
For now, in America we have billions of barrels of oil available for use. We need to drill and retrieve that for our fuel before we do more stupid things that not only cost poor people around the world from soaring food costs, but the damage the pursuit is doing to the environment.
What's worse about all this is many small towns joined the bandwagon, hoping it would produce some jobs for the communities. Now they have empty buildings and ruined dreams as the fantasy of ethanol being some type of savior to the community has come crashing to the ground.
Yet in the midst of the government-induced economic crisis we're now in, they still hold to devastating and disastrous ideas that interfere in markets and destroy the lives of unsuspecting people.
Related Stories:
U.S. Ethanol Subsidies to Keep Food Prices High Everywhere
More Reasons to Drop the Ethanol Nonsense
Ethanol no more than Heavily Subsidized Cash Crop Supported by Powerful Lobby
Corn Farmers in Denial over Taking Responsibility for High Cost of Food
Is U.S. Government Responding Quickly Enough to the Ethanol Disaster?
Tensions Continue Building as Ethanol Continues to Cause Increase in Corn, Food Prices
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
Agri-Ethanol Products Company Founders Indicted for Bribery, Extortion
The founders of Agri-Ethanol Products, Jim Perry and Dave Brady, have been indicted by a grand jury on a number charges.
Charges include conspiring to commit extortion and bribery, aiding and abetting extortion, and aiding and abetting bribery. Both men have also been charged with perjury in relationship to the case.
Evidently the two wanted to speed up the process of attaining permits from the N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, and so allegedly offered a DENR employee $196,000 in exchange for moving things through quicker.
Boyce Allen Hudson, the DENR worker pleaded guilty in early 2008 to extortion and money laundering. He is currently serving a 40 month prison sentence.
The failed Agri-Ethanol Products company had original plans to build up to 20 ethanol plants along the East coast.
Charges include conspiring to commit extortion and bribery, aiding and abetting extortion, and aiding and abetting bribery. Both men have also been charged with perjury in relationship to the case.
Evidently the two wanted to speed up the process of attaining permits from the N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, and so allegedly offered a DENR employee $196,000 in exchange for moving things through quicker.
Boyce Allen Hudson, the DENR worker pleaded guilty in early 2008 to extortion and money laundering. He is currently serving a 40 month prison sentence.
The failed Agri-Ethanol Products company had original plans to build up to 20 ethanol plants along the East coast.
Thursday, August 21, 2008
More Reasons to Free us from the Ethanol Devil
The growing number of reasons to drop ethanol and its government subsidies continues to reveal the utter stupidity of pursuing ethanol as a significant source of renewable fuel.
As people continue to deconstruct the arguments made in favor of ethanol, it's getting clearer and clearer it's an initiative pushed by special interest groups who created fear of foreign energy dependency at the cost of sanity.
While we obviously need to look at real alternatives in the years ahead, we are far from being in some type of serious trouble, as the billions of barrels of oil under American soil, as well as under its oceans attest to.
Environmentalists and opportunist have created this false problem by panicking people into believing we're on the cusp of a worldwide disaster, when in reality there's enough oil to last for decades ... if not longer.
Recent discoveries in Brazilian waters, along with the huge oil deposits in the Canadian oil sands are also proof of the need to slow down and take into account all the effects and unintended consequences that always accompany decisions that are motivated by fear and political expediency.
As people continue to deconstruct the arguments made in favor of ethanol, it's getting clearer and clearer it's an initiative pushed by special interest groups who created fear of foreign energy dependency at the cost of sanity.
While we obviously need to look at real alternatives in the years ahead, we are far from being in some type of serious trouble, as the billions of barrels of oil under American soil, as well as under its oceans attest to.
Environmentalists and opportunist have created this false problem by panicking people into believing we're on the cusp of a worldwide disaster, when in reality there's enough oil to last for decades ... if not longer.
Recent discoveries in Brazilian waters, along with the huge oil deposits in the Canadian oil sands are also proof of the need to slow down and take into account all the effects and unintended consequences that always accompany decisions that are motivated by fear and political expediency.
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
U.S. Ethanol Subsidies to Keep Food Prices High Everywhere
The outrageous subsidy for corn-based ethanol in the U.S. continues to batter consumers across the world, as even though other commodities have been dropping, food prices are expected to stay the same, and in a number of cases - rise.
For retail food prices in the U.S., they have been growing at a 6 percent rate this year, in contrast to the regular inflation rate at about 2 percent.
With irresponsible politicians and ongoing ignoring of stories like this by the mainstream media, the cost of food items related to corn price increases like chicken, beef and pork are projected to continue rising for the immediate future. The majority of that related to the misguided and terrible idea of subsidizing big corporate corn farmers so it can look like the government is doing something related to energy.
The disaster will continue until the story is continually reported on and the reality of the consequences understood by the public.
The next meat to be affected will be chicken, which so far producers haven't passed on the higher feed costs to consumers, but Bill Roenigk, senior vice president of the National Chicken Council said that's all about to change.
"From a consumer standpoint, more and more of these feed costs are going to be passed on and that means higher prices at the supermarket," said Roenigk.
All this because of the usual pressure from special interest groups with an agenda, as well as a government that continues to pass themselves off as the big daddy of the universe. Until this attitude is reined in, Americans and people around the world will continue to suffer from the continual rise in food prices.
Just like we need to drill for the billions of barrels of oil on American soil or it's coastlines, so we need to stop this outrageous subsidy that is helping no one but the huge corporate corn farmers in America, as well as some landowners cashing in on rising farmland prices.
For retail food prices in the U.S., they have been growing at a 6 percent rate this year, in contrast to the regular inflation rate at about 2 percent.
With irresponsible politicians and ongoing ignoring of stories like this by the mainstream media, the cost of food items related to corn price increases like chicken, beef and pork are projected to continue rising for the immediate future. The majority of that related to the misguided and terrible idea of subsidizing big corporate corn farmers so it can look like the government is doing something related to energy.
The disaster will continue until the story is continually reported on and the reality of the consequences understood by the public.
The next meat to be affected will be chicken, which so far producers haven't passed on the higher feed costs to consumers, but Bill Roenigk, senior vice president of the National Chicken Council said that's all about to change.
"From a consumer standpoint, more and more of these feed costs are going to be passed on and that means higher prices at the supermarket," said Roenigk.
All this because of the usual pressure from special interest groups with an agenda, as well as a government that continues to pass themselves off as the big daddy of the universe. Until this attitude is reined in, Americans and people around the world will continue to suffer from the continual rise in food prices.
Just like we need to drill for the billions of barrels of oil on American soil or it's coastlines, so we need to stop this outrageous subsidy that is helping no one but the huge corporate corn farmers in America, as well as some landowners cashing in on rising farmland prices.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
