Posted on 03/19/2008 10:16:36 PM PDT by neverdem
Yup
We’re doomed. What insanity!
Yup. You expect this kind of ignorance and incompetence from Democrats, but the bozos ‘leading’ the Republican party are just as guilty, if not more so.
Yup. You expect this kind of ignorance and incompetence from Democrats, but the bozos ‘leading’ the Republican party are just as guilty, if not more so.
Every time they screw with the market, we get screwed.
FR also has it's share of Ethonuts, as well as Gorebal warming kooks.
Happy to say that I don't buy either one.
When man starts burning food and wasting land for fuel, he has gone over the deep end.
Yup. Get the government out of the way. Leave the private sector alone. Haven't even the common folks learned from the Carter Years?
Economics courses should be required in high school and college.
Nah, that couldn't be...
Who eats 450# of feed-corn per year? The sky is falling! Ethanol will kill us all!
Brazil is magic, we can't do what they have done. The highly profitable ethanol plants only run on government dollars. Why invest in alternative fuels now when we can keep giving Oil barons our money and trust them to wean us off of their product. The status quo cannot be improved in my lifetime, I'll fight progress away from petroleum till I die. Make my kids drink MTBE, anything but natural safe renewable bio-fuel.
Crazy, but plausible theory:
1. This consumes our exportable corn, other grains don’t get planted. Other exporting countries do the same.
2. Food becomes more expensive by design. Americans can stand to pay more/eat less (this may actually do some good in the big scheme of things-go to a discount store and you will instantly feel 20 pounds lighter and five years younger).
3. Food prices go up worldwide and surpluses disappear.
4. Almost no middle eastern country can feed itself and we and other exporting countries hold the power on controlling food prices, or even its availability.
Google “grain shortages” and you will see some interesting evidence for this, particularly the fifth one. Water is pretty scarce there, too...
Elementary School. Teach it while they're still smart enough to understand it.
And Hillary and Barack want to put our healthcare in those hands...
Very interesting - thanks for your post.
Ethanol is hydroscopic and, even if one could temporarily remove all water, it absorbs water from the surrounding atmosphere.
Subsidized, corn derived ethanol doesn't make much sense, IMHO. I want energy independence. I have no problem with fuel from biomass, waste, switchgrass, etc.
The word you want is hygroscopic, from Greek meaning it absorbs moisture.
Right. Hygroscopic, new glasses and more coffee. Thanks.
Williams appears to be off by a factor of several hundred on this figure alone:
"In general, the production of ethanol consumes roughly four gallons of water for every one gallon of ethanol produced, although the figure ranges from 3.5 to 6 in Minnesota ethanol plants. This figure varies from plant to plant depending on the processes that each plant uses to produce the fuel. In general, newer plants have been growing more efficient with their water use." - link
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.