His stance on ethanol sets Cal professor apart

Contra Costa Times ^ | 9/26/5 | Judy Silber

[Hendrix]

Not to be rude, but I know more about the law than you ever will (I have two law degrees). I would explain it for you, but it would take too long.

It's been fun folks, but I got to run.

[RWCon]

And the drinkers! What a waste of good alcohol!

[thackney]

people will tell you that they rarely haul anything

Again, you are changing your claim. First you challenged who should drive the vehicles, then claimed you wanted to change the vehicles. Next you claimed never, then changed to rarely. So, how often do I have to load up my Bronco or Expedition to defend it to you? Do you have to wonder why people will not take you seriously?

[Liberty Tree Surgeon]

If you are going to mention Adam Smith, you need to carry your economic analysis through to the point you've captured the externalities - the cost in lives (1,900) and treasure ($300 billion) to keep the oil flowing in the Mid-East. The knee-jerk response of invoking Marx on your opponent is only worthy of liberal "racist, sexist, homophobe" type ad hominem attacks, and should be discouraged.

[spunkets]

"Now obviously, I can't haul a full sized travel trailer of boat with my vehicle, nor do I use it as a contractor would, but it serves my purposes."

Sure. I used a Festiva to haul more concrete grain and lumber than you did on a regular basis. Of course I gutted it and redid the suspension and tires first. However, I have a truck to do the serious hauling. Festivas and Tauruses just don't have the balls to take on more than the occasional overload.

[-YYZ-]

Why don't we bump up the ethanol percentage and it will help reduce our gasoline usage.

Because, if this guy is correct, the amount of energy contained in a gallon of ethanol is less than the amount of energy consumed to produce it. In other words, every gallon of it consumed actually increases the demand for other fuels, primarily fossil fuels.

OTOH, I've seen other studies that say the energy balance is positive, albeit not by a large amount. Given the quantity of subsidies for both corn and for ethanol production it seems apparent that at the least it is not a cost-effective way of producing fuel, although $60/bbl oil may have changed that. So the question remains, would anyone be doing corn to ethanol production without government subsidies?

[thackney]

Do you believe yelling makes your argument stronger? It tells me how weak it is when you have to resort to yelling.

[rusty millet]

Currently a plant called Switchgrass leads the pack for producing ethanol. Still it is not economical (for the grower or processor) without government subsidies.

Switchgrass does not really lead the pack for producing ethanol, it was just the original model system used for research. It requires an environmentally-unfriendly acid hydrolysis of the biomass to convert lignocellulose to sugars that can be fermented. Grains are used since the sugars in the starch tend to be the readily fermentable kind. If the process for lignocellulosic fermentation gets worked out, any type of plant material (including wood chip byproducts) could be used. Some very close to the industry say that the process has been "10 years from commercialization" for 50 years.

[BurbankKarl]

Of course he is right.

[CSM]

"I have owned several trucks and one SUV, and I rarely hauled anything in them."

Ah, now I see, guilt ridden emotions begging for a government smack down. The birth place of every liberal piece of legislation.

[antiRepublicrat]

Switchgrass is a better choice than corn; it grows with very little care (and in poor soils) and has more energy content than corn.

True, but switchgrass doesn't have mega agro-conglomerates like ADM lobbying for its use and subsidies to promote its use.

[-YYZ-]

Using ethanol is more a way of using excess corn production and I think that is fine for that purpose.

But why is there excess corn production, year after year? I think we all know the answer to that question. Would seem to be smarter to not subsidize the over production of corn so as to end up with a cheap feedstock for an inefficient fuel.

[radioman]

How are you getting it started and what are you doing with the empty cans?:)

The Omni-Pak ignition will fire wet plugs with no problem. This is not new technology. Racers have been running methanol for decades. The methanol is delivered in 55 gallon drums and the farm supply picks up the empties.
.

[thackney]

I have two law degrees

At least we now understand your stance for "we need more laws".

[antiRepublicrat]

We also are regulating small diesels out of existence, even thought they use less fuel and put out less CO2, CO and HC than equivalent gasoline engines, because of NOx and particulates.

Sad, espeically considering you can make cheap, clean biodiesel in your garage using leftover vegatable oil and run that in your diesel. Such small diesels are popular in Europe, and some, like VW/Audi's TDi and Mercedes' diesel, are great. This ain't your grand-dad's diesel anymore.

[CSM]

"I know more about the law than you ever will (I have two law degrees). I would explain it for you, but it would take too long."

So, you have been indoctrinated that the Constitution is a living document. That's all your statement tells the FR community. Let me give you a hint, if it takes to long to explain then it doesn't exist in the original intent of the document.

[flashbunny]

Uh, because all fuel usage isn't done by cars, genius.

[flashbunny]

"It's been fun folks, but I got to run."

And hide.

Please, for the sake of the constitution and conservatism, keep running.

[-YYZ-]

Do you want a government that controls how big your house may be? How far you are allowed to travel for vacation? How far away from work you are allowed to live? What kind of recreation you do? (boating, racing, RV's all consume fuel)

Here's the thing, in my mind. The gov't already decided how much of the money you earn you will get to keep. How is it essentially different for the gov't to interfere in all those other things? All for the greater good, of course (rolls eyes, sighs).