HOW BIOFUELS COULD STARVE THE POOR.

prospect.org ^ | April 25, 2008 | Ezra Klein

[paltz]

Your batting no numbers. I gave you plenty...

[paltz]

Now please tell me why ethanol subsidies are such a great thing?

[paltz]

Also, please tell me why you’re sputtering all this pinko watermelon nonsense all over FR? Hanging out with Newt, Pat Robertson, Nany Pelosi and Al Gore a lot lately or just making a tidy buck off raping the taxpayers when they’re forced to overpay for the environmental mandates you seem so happy to endorse. What’s your carbon foot print?

[Balding_Eagle]

Were there any economic advisers in the House/White House when this was being cooked up, or just “Green is Good Politics” pollsters?

You do recall that this occured in 1994 don't you?

In fact it was just this past week that then Vice President Al Gore proudly and loudly cast the tie breaking vote in the Senate mandating todays level of ethanol.

[Wonder Warthog]

"Your batting no numbers. I gave you plenty..."

No, dear boy. You posted SEARCH PAGES, not numbers. And in the one link that DID go to an article, the "proof" was nonexistent. If that kind of article is what you think constitutes proof, then you're in a world of hurt.

[Wonder Warthog]

"Now please tell me why ethanol subsidies are such a great thing?"

Go back and re-read ALL my postings, and you'll see I made no statements to that effect. What I said was that I do NOT believe that production of ethanol from corn is the major reason for the rise in food prices. And the article leading in to this thread agrees with ME, not you.

[Wonder Warthog]

"Also, please tell me why you’re sputtering all this pinko watermelon nonsense all over FR?"

Because I know that producing ethanol from corn results in an overall increase in the total quantity of food. The reason that is so is that only about 1/3 (the carbohydrate fraction) of the corn is converted---the rest (the protein and oil fractions) re-enters the food chain in a form that is actually HIGHER in food value per pound than the original corn.

I also know that a great deal of land was taken out of corn production as yields of corn TRIPLED from the 1950's to the current day, so that 33% loss can easily be made up by increased production.

Lastly, I know what a tiny fraction of the price that the actual grain constitutes of the overall cost of a given food product.

My own opinion is that the current increase in the price of food is due to 1) increased fuel costs, and 2) speculation.

As to "pinko watermelon"---bullshit. The above are simple facts that fly in the face of all the hoopla about "burning food for fuel" (a cute sound bite with no meaning) as being the reason for food price increases.

[HangThemHigh]

"You do recall that this occurred in 1994 don't you?"

I am a little fuzzy on the exact details, but they have been putting ethanol in gasoline for a while, earlier than '94, I think. There was experiment gone awry with methanol too. Recently, under Bush, a huge increase in the ethanol content was mandated. This change has the ethanol industry scrambling to add capacity and is resulting in pressure on food prices.

I was looking for links on this and it looks like many states are taking the lead on mandating 10% ethanol in gas. I thought 10% ethanol was part of the wording, but the Energy Act of 2005 just sets the amount of biofuel (ethanol) to be added to gasoline, ratcheting up to 7.5 billion gallons by 2012.

[paltz]

So you want to rape the taxpayer, instead letting it see if it can survive on it’s own in the market. How free market thinking of you!!! When Ethanol can’t survive on it’s own in the market, dig into the taxpayer’s pockets! I have news for you, that is watermelon logic.

[paltz]

BTW, just by typing in "ethanol" into their searches, it took me about 3 minutes to find these. Of course, being the tax loving individual of ethanol you seem to be, it really doesn't matter how many studies, article, and op-eds from the conservative/libertarian think tanks continue to refute why ethanol mandates/subsidies are harmful

http://www.heritage.org/Press/Commentary/ed022608c.cfm

http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/wm1750.cfm

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=7308

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=8730

http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=20943&CFID=2799762&CFTOKEN=89473594

http://cei.org/gencon/004,06075.cfm

[paltz]

I also know that a great deal of land was taken out of corn production as yields of corn TRIPLED from the 1950's to the current day, so that 33% loss can easily be made up by increased production. According to Heritage the farmers are planting LESS corn not MORE.

http://www.heritage.org/Press/Commentary/ed022608c.cfm

Ethanol advocates are also promoting other biofuels whose cellulose can be used in place of corn. But the "food vs. fuel" problem isn't solved if farmers remove acreage from corn production to plant these instead. The ethanol lobby claims that the higher costs of food are being pushed mostly by the higher costs of energy. Of course, subsidizing ethanol while suppressing domestic oil and gas drilling and halting construction of oil refineries and nuclear power plants is a big reason why energy costs keep climbing!

http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/bg2020.cfm

ummmm....I have yet to see any studies, or number coming from your right leaning think tanks, or are they all from the corn lobby?

[Wonder Warthog]

"So you want to rape the taxpayer, instead letting it see if it can survive on it’s own in the market. How free market thinking of you!!! When Ethanol can’t survive on it’s own in the market, dig into the taxpayer’s pockets! I have news for you, that is watermelon logic."

Y'know, you've got a VERY vivid imagination. NOWHERE in any of my posts have I in ANY WAY referred to the presence or absence of subsidies, so you can stop trying to beat me with that stick.

[Wonder Warthog]

"BTW, just by typing in "ethanol" into their searches, it took me about 3 minutes to find these. Of course, being the tax loving individual of ethanol you seem to be, it really doesn't matter how many studies, article, and op-eds from the conservative/libertarian think tanks continue to refute why ethanol mandates/subsidies are harmful"

Y'know, I actually wasted my time reading the first three of your links, and they just continue the repitition of the same "talking points", over and over and over. Not one real shred of HARD DATA is present in them. It appears that you needed to spend a bit more than three minutes looking things up.

[Wonder Warthog]

"But the "food vs. fuel" problem isn't solved if farmers remove acreage from corn production to plant these instead."

You REALLY don't understand the issues, do you. One of the main points of using switchgrass (in addition to it's greater efficiency of ethanol production), is that IT GROWS OVER LARGE AREAS WHERE CORN WILL NOT GROW. This isn't to say that there's not some overlap.

"I have yet to see any studies, or number coming from your right leaning think tanks, or are they all from the corn lobby?"

The posted article is enough for me. Or have you forgotten so quickly that it says directly that "two-thirds to three quarters" of the rise in retail food prices has nothing to do with the cost of grain.

[hedgetrimmer]

George W. Bush's trip to Latin America this month is the most ambitious attempt to reposition the United States in the region since the Free Trade Agreement of the Americas died in Mar del Plata in November of 2005. The trip, which includes Brazil, Uruguay, Mexico, Guatemala, and Colombia has a dual purpose: to counteract the growing influence of Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez in the region and to form a strategic alliance with Brazil for the production of ethanol.

Jeb Bush, who left the Florida governorship last January, now directs the Inter-American Ethanol Commission, "an organization through which Washington seeks to diversify its relations with Latin America," according to an article from the ANSA news agency dated Feb. 23.

The commission was born out of a high-level U.S.-Brazil business alliance. On Dec. 18, still-Governor Jeb Bush, president of the Agri-Business Council of São Paulo and former Brazilian Minister of Agriculture Roberto Rodrigues, and president of the Inter-American Development Bank Alberto Moreno announced the formation of the commission "that has as its mission to promote the use of ethanol in gasoline mixtures throughout the Americas."3

A month later in his Jan. 22 State of the Union speech, President Bush proposed the promotion of a law to mandate use of a gasoline mixture of 20% ethanol over the next ten years. The objective is to reduce the vulnerability of the country to actions from hostile states.

However, this entails an increase of 800% in the consumption of ethanol by 2017. Even if corn production in the United States grew 30% a year, it could not satisfy the demand for biofuels while at the same time providing for food demand. Thus the need to seek strategic partners.

We must also change how we power our automobiles. We will increase our research in better batteries for hybrid and electric cars, and in pollution-free cars that run on hydrogen. We'll also fund additional research in cutting-edge methods of producing ethanol, not just from corn, but from wood chips and stalks, or switch grass. Our goal is to make this new kind of ethanol practical and competitive within six years. --GW Bush, 2006

--Now, where do you see Al Gore in this story?

[hedgetrimmer]

They are making Jeb Bush rich beyond his wildest dreams.

[hedgetrimmer]

They were in Brazil, forming the ethanol alliance and subsizing BRAZILLIAN farmers...

Ethanol giants U.S., Brazil start biofuels forum

Updated Sat. Mar. 3 2007 9:57 AM ET

Associated Press

UNITED NATIONS -- The world's two top ethanol producers -- the U.S. and Brazil -- announced the creation of an international forum to help expand the global market for biofuels, just days before the two countries are expected to sign a separate agreement promoting ethanol across the Western Hemisphere.

The International Biofuel Forum will meet regularly for a year to draft global standards for biofuel production, find ways to open markets and encourage investment in countries with the potential to develop the industry, officials said Friday.

"By working together we will be able to identify ways to help countries with agricultural potential become major energy suppliers," said Thomas A. Shannon, Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs. "We think this is a huge step forward in the development of a new international understanding of energy."

...But teaming up with Brazil on the promotion of ethanol hasn't pleased everyone: Corn farmers in the U.S. don't like the idea of the government helping Brazil's industry, which they see as a competitor.

[paltz]

The posted article is enough for me. Or have you forgotten so quickly that it says directly that "two-thirds to three quarters" of the rise in retail food prices has nothing to do with the cost of grain.

No you just don't have any real numbers to back up any of your claims yet you insist EVERYBODY else dig up studies for you, and then not address each one. Therefore, I say B.S. to what ever claims you're making. And you still seem content to rape the tax payer for ethanol subsidies.

[paltz]

The posted article is enough for me. Or have you forgotten so quickly that it says directly that "two-thirds to three quarters" of the rise in retail food prices has nothing to do with the cost of grain.

No you just don't have any real numbers to back up any of your claims yet you insist EVERYBODY else dig up studies for you, and then not address each one. Therefore, I say B.S. to what ever claims you're making. And you still seem content to rape the tax payer for ethanol subsidies.

[Wonder Warthog]

"No you just don't have any real numbers to back up any of your claims yet you insist EVERYBODY else dig up studies for you, and then not address each one."

No, I'm insisting that YOU come up with some REAL numbers to back up YOUR contention that ethanol production is the major factor in the rise of food prices, instead of continually re-linking to the same lame stories (note--NOT studies, because none of them have hard data worth a damn). Look, dude, I'm a PhD Chemist. I KNOW what constitutes hard data and what doesn't, and the pieces you've linked to simply don't qualify. And if those are the quality of stuff that the Heritage Foundation and CEI puts out, then SHAME on them for doing a lousy job.

And you can take your constant harping about "ethanol subsidies" and stick it in your ear. I could care less whether ethanol is subsidized or not. The existence or lack of same of subsidies is simply irrelevant to the point I'm making, which is that crop price rises are not the biggest factor in food price rises.