Posted on 03/19/2008 10:16:36 PM PDT by neverdem
One of the many mandates of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 calls for oil companies to increase the amount of ethanol mixed with gasoline. During his 2006 State of the Union Address, President Bush said, “America is addicted to oil, which is often imported from unstable parts of the world.” Let’s look at some of the “wonders” of ethanol as a replacement for gasoline.
Ethanol contains water that distillation cannot remove. As such, it can cause major damage to automobile engines not specifically designed to burn ethanol. The water content of ethanol also risks pipeline corrosion and thus must be shipped by truck, rail car or barge. These shipping methods are far more expensive than pipelines.
Ethanol is 20-30% less efficient than gasoline, making it more expensive per highway mile. It takes 450 pounds of corn to produce the ethanol to fill one SUV tank. That’s enough corn to feed one person for a year. Plus, it takes more than one gallon of fossil fuel—oil and natural gas—to produce one gallon of ethanol. After all, corn must be grown, fertilized, harvested and trucked to ethanol producers—all of which are fuel-using activities. And, it takes 1,700 gallons of water to produce one gallon of ethanol. On top of all this, if our total annual corn output were put to ethanol production, it would reduce gasoline consumption by 10-12%.
Ethanol is so costly that it wouldn’t make it in a free market. That’s why Congress has enacted major ethanol subsidies, about $1.05 to $1.38 a gallon, which is no less than a tax on consumers. In fact, there’s a double tax—one in the form of ethanol subsidies and another in the form of handouts to corn farmers to the tune of $9.5 billion in 2005.
There’s something else wrong with this picture. If Congress and President Bush say we need less reliance on oil and greater use of renewable fuels, then why would Congress impose a stiff tariff, 54 cents a gallon, on ethanol from Brazil? Brazilian ethanol, by the way, is produced from sugar cane and is far more energy efficient, cleaner and cheaper to produce.
Ethanol production has driven up the prices of corn-fed livestock, chicken and dairy products, and products made from corn. As a result of higher demand for corn, other grain prices, such as soybean and wheat, have risen dramatically. The fact that the U.S. is the world’s largest grain producer and exporter means that the ethanol-induced higher grain prices will have a worldwide impact on food prices.
It’s easy to understand how the public, looking for cheaper gasoline, can be taken in by the call for increased ethanol usage. But politicians, corn farmers and ethanol producers know they are running a cruel hoax on the American consumer. They are in it for the money. Ethanol producers and the farm lobby have pressured farm-state congressmen into believing that it would be political suicide if they didn’t support subsidized ethanol production. That’s the stick. Campaign contributions are the carrot.
The ethanol hoax is a good example of a problem economists refer to as narrow, well-defined benefits versus widely dispersed costs. It pays the ethanol lobby to organize and collect money to grease the palms of politicians willing to do their bidding because there’s a large benefit for them. The millions of gasoline consumers, who fund the benefits through higher fuel and food prices, as well as taxes, are relatively uninformed and have little clout. After all, who do you think a politician will invite into his office to have a heart-to-heart—you or an ethanol executive?
God also gave us the sun, corn, radioactive elements, rivers, wind, swamp gas, what's your point! Do you believe using only oil is the smartest way? Use the brain God gave you and you will realize that if we unscrupulously use only nonrenewable forms of energy that are easy to tap, soon future generations of our ever expanding population will have less resources than we do to work with. There is no way to prevent it, but we can reduce our use and hope that with improved technology they'll have a better standard of living even with reduced resources.
You’re one of the few Americans that “gets it”.
corn? read the article.
There will be a free market solution to replace petroleum as an energy source when it is feasable, practical, and profitable and NECESSARY. Not until. Oil IS the lifeblood of the American economy. What should be being worked towards now is increasing the petroleum final products, gasoline, propane heating oil. Not HOPING for “pie in the sky” feel good, “green”, government subsidised alternative energy “solutions” while the American economy goes in the tank!
Energy is the lifeblood of our economy,and ethanol is
another form of energy. And its price from the
refinery is over a dollar a gal less than the pump
price of gas, and that price has no price supports for
corn in it. When used by big oil company to add to gas
they get a tax credit, which is wrong, but that
ain’t the fault of corn, farmers or ethanol.
There is more than 350,000 barrels a day produced,
and it is a help.And as I said it isn’t a favorite
of the deep green movemement as it makes farm viable
which the greens don’t want. Most price rises are
due to over leveraged speculating which is getting
reined in a little after the BSterns firm collapsed,
and gov pressure is forcing investers to get some funds
out of commodities that shouldn’ be there. Last couple
weeks gold down a hundred, corn down a little ,
oil down, ethanol down...Ed
Don't wait for your ship to come in. Row out to meet it!
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.