Posted on 05/31/2011 1:44:23 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Sarah Palin was asked Tuesday about the sticky subject of ethanol subsidies, and she said that not only they should they be squelched but that all federal energy subsidies should be eradicated.
"I think that all of our energy subsidies need to be relooked at today and eliminated," Palin told Real Clear Politics at a coffee shop in Dillsburg, Pa. "And we need to make sure that we're investing and allowing our businesses to invest in reliable energy products right now that aren't going to necessitate subsidies because, bottom line, we can't afford it."
Ever the maverick, Palin was responding was in direct opposition to Mitt Romney, who last week in Iowa, came out in favor of government subsidies for ethanol, the fuel produced from corn and other farm products.
"I support the subsidy of ethanol. I believe ethanol's an important part of our energy solution in this country," Romney told a supporter from West Des Moines on Friday.
Neither former governor has officially stated his or her intention to run for the GOP nomination for president; however, Romney is expected to throw his hat in the ring later this week.
One former governor who has committed to running is Tim Pawlenty. In fact, it was in his statement announcing his candidacy that he also backed the elimination of ethanol and other energy subsidies. Unlike Palin, however, Pawlenty wants to take it slowly.....
(Excerpt) Read more at latimesblogs.latimes.com ...
Not exactly, food corn varieties are not ideal for ethanol production, so most farmers intending for the ethanol market grow ethanol preferred varieties. They are different commodities but still corn.
Farm subsidies are definitely on the table, and definitely should be. The free market should prevail wherever possible, but farmers are not all bad guys, and farming has specific risks that need to be addressed.
Even if that is the case, I would also point out this:
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2006/09/07/ethanolnow/
I am not defending mewykwistmas’ beliefs, but it seems to me that he/she was zotted for merely bringing up the fact that no one has seen Governor Palin’s long form birth certificate. Now, I have no serious doubt that Gov. Palin is, indeed, a U.S.-born citizen and the child of 2 people who were, at the time of her birth, citizens themselves. I am also highly, highly suspicious of Obama’s alleged “long form” birth certificate (there are serious doubts as to it being unmodified), but merely asking EVERY candidate to “show me yours” doesn’t a troll make, nor does mere disagreement with established opinion here on FR (and I say that as someone who’s been a member since 2000).
I don’t know mewykwistmas from Adam, but I’d respectfully suggest that he/she be reinstated. This zot was not called for, at least not in the absence of other troll-like behavior of which I’m not aware.
Maybe your numbers are still wrong. Source?
As well as this: http://acad.carleton.edu/projects/ethanol/EthanolandWaterFAQs.htm
There is absolutely NO reason for you to be spamming every thread related to Sarah Palin with that info about her being a natural born citizen. First because there is no question about it, and second, because we get your point already. Sheesh!
You long go ceased to be informative and tilted way over into annoyingly obsessive.
That makes more sense. Combined with light-bulb's comments, that oil used to grow the corn is probably in the form of diesel. So we might be saving gasoline but at the expense of using more diesel.
I'm fine with killing the program first and then looking at it. If the information presented here is anywhere close to accurate, then they shouldn't have to look at it long to confirm killing it was the right decision.
Good call! That troll has been begging for it.
Even best case scenarios aren’t much better. Leaving aside Pimentel, see this: http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/alternative-fuel/biofuels/4237539
“The National Renewable Energy Laboratory states that, “Today, 1 Btu of fossil energy consumed in producing and delivering corn ethanol results in 1.3 Btu of usable energy in your fuel tank.””
Add in the water costs, and it’s a big WTF situation.
Now, if you want to talk cellulosic ethanol, that’s another story. But corn ethanol is STUPID.
And food stamps are via the Dept. of Ag...there’s a reason the farm pimps love that.
(foods stamps use up 64% in 4 years...)
Thanks for the correction. You are dead-on. I really meant E15. It’s the new standard people are asking for now blended with all Gasoline. It’s enough to cause damage to vehicles.
Thank you much!
Take it easy, FRiend. Those posts merely reinforce Sarah’s eligibility.
There's your answer.
Thank you, AM!
Worse, somewhere in the world some innocent kids* are starving to death because we are burning food for fuel. If the world had an oversupply of food, this would not be an issue, but that’s not the case.
Only if you can produce ethanol from land (or sea?) that will not support food crops does it make sense. And even then there are other factors to consider.
*Granted, the parents are also to blame for having kids they can’t feed, but that’s not the children’s fault.
Imho, you could not be more wrong.
Only if he makes a profit producing and marketing a product other than ethanol corn.
If he fails and goes out of business, then he succeeded on the subsidies only and the equipment charges to cost were valid.
Moreover, the free market would have decided and corrected itself.
There are three types of corn grown in the US: Seed corn (which we need not discuss here), field or dent corn and sweet corn.
Sweet corn is what you eat as corn-on-the-cob. The number of acres planted to sweet corn is low; I doubt that the total acres for sweet corn in the US reaches 100,000 acres.
Field/Dent corn: This is the “industrial” corn, used for feed, HFCS, corn meal, grits, ethanol, HFCS, etc. This is what is planted on usually at least 85 *million* acres of farm ground in the US.
For all those people pontificating on this thread about ethanol, here’s a couple clues:
1. The farmers receive no direct subsidy “for ethanol” unless they’re part owners in an ethanol plant (and some farming co-ops are). The per-gallon blenders credit goes to the oil companies to put the stuff into your gasoline. Ethanol is merely another market buyer for their corn, along with feedlots, pig feeding operations, HFCS suppliers, etc. That’s it. The same field corn will go to any of these outfits.
2. As long as there is the correct differential between gasoline and corn prices, making corn into ethanol will be profitable. Want a free market where corn for ethanol becomes non-viable? Crater the price of gasoline while you keep the price of corn high. Ethanol disappears overnight.
Since the commodities markets are moving mostly in relation to the plummeting value of the USD, that’s not about to happen. Since we’ve having widespread flooding preventing farmers from planting corn this season, I would expect corn prices to remain high or go higher - even if you could wave a wand and make ethanol disappear overnight now. If the ground continues wet for another three weeks, you’ll see the price of soybeans go through the roof too. When we sold our hay farm in 2007, premium dairy hay was running $130/ton. Right now, that exact same type of hay is running $200+/ton *at the farm* (ie, the cost of transport has gone up too, but those numbers I just quoted are pre-trucking) and there is NO futures market on hay. There are no speculators to blame for hay prices, there are no manipulations by Goldman Sachs, there are no subsidies on hay, etc. Hay is a cash-only crop, and in that area, has absolutely NO subsidies whatsoever.
Americans have gotten used to cheap food. Well, I’m here to tell you, thanks to Ben Bernanke and his magic helicopters, your days of cheap food are over. Our crop prices look so damn cheap overseas that China et al are buying HUGE stocks of our crops and taking away all prior assumptions of year-to-year surpluses (called “carry-out” in farmer lingo).
If you want a truly “free market” in American ag, here’s my suggestion for people: Get used to much higher food prices. The producers who can’t make it go without higher prices will have to drop out of farming, and that will remove some of our carry out. Without a significant increase in the value of the US dollar, “free trade” exports of our crops to countries with huge trade surpluses or strong currencies will finish the job. You will be paying double what you’re paying for food now.
Now, I, as a former farmer who existed and penciled an operation with NO subsidies, I would like to see subsidies gone. But I also know what all the consequences of this will be. You won’t hear me whinging about the high price of food.... because I know that farmers still aren’t getting HALF of the per-unit commodity prices they received for foodstuffs in 1973, when we last had any tie to the gold standard. Corn would be over $14/bu today if food prices were the same as late ‘73, adjusted for inflation. Instead, they’re less than half of that, in inflated dollars, with diesel fuel climbing through the roof. But I do know that without subsidies, there will be significant increases in food prices now, from corn through beef, you name it.
There is no “ethanol corn.”
There is only field corn. Where it goes is a matter of who is paying the most and who is the closest to the farm (ie, where can the farmer minimize his transport costs).
From the standpoint of availability of food resources, would it not make more sense to use everything in the corn as foodstuff? Or does the ethanol come from only the part of the corn the cattle would turn into methane, without any advantage to the cattle?
Also, from the standpoint of feeding people, when there is not enough to go around, production of beef is an inefficent way to provide foodstuffs. (Ok, ok, I like a good burger or steak too...)
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.