From: HLS on 20 Dec 2007 14:03
"C. E. White" <cewhite3(a)removemindspring.com> wrote in message
> I am not sure that ethanol is the answer, but I also think that the
> anti-ethanol lobby is lying through their collective teeth. I know who
> is funding the pro-ethanol lobby. Who is funding the anti-ethanol
> lobby? I'd say follow the money......Who stands to loose the most if
> ethanol displaces a significant amount of foreign oil?
Fully agree with this, Ed. Everybody has a different axe to grind in this
From: VZLN.Biker on 20 Dec 2007 14:17
In our case we are experiencing troubles with the ethanol and gasoline
mixture. In most of the mechanic workshops that i have to visit cuz of
the job, at least 7 out of 10 cars are having some kind of problem
with the fuel system. Burned pumps, dirty injectors and carbs are what
u see. And we grow sugar cane to produce ethanol because of the
latitude, but i sure agree with some people who think there is still
too much hunger in the world to just drop food production to make
fuel. That doesnt make sense to me i have to say, cuz id rather feed
my family than my car. And im not willing to pay more money for food
Besides, we are so used to good and cheap fuel that this crappy gas
the goverment is selling to us just doesnt cut it. Ill turn to
alternative fuels when they manage a way of using the hydrogen from
water to run a V-8. ill bet its gonna have a lot of "gas mileage".
From: Steve on 20 Dec 2007 16:55
Kevin Bottorff wrote:
> Steve <no(a)spam.thanks> wrote in
>>They GET similar amounts, but the claim is that much more runs off from
>>corn than the others and winds up in the river.
> That is not proven to be true at all. Nitrogen runoff from corn has
> dramaticly dropped per acre in the last 10 years as nitrogen use per acre
> has dropped as better research and cost of nitrogen has changed.
The claim was only true RELATIVE to other crops. I don't know if its
valid or not.
> really chafts my britches is town and city people fertilizing there
> worthless lawns with 10 times the amount of fert. I use per acre. My crop
> has value, your lawn is worthless other than the O2 it produces. Also
> more pesticides are dumped on lawns at a incorect rate that most all the
> farms. KB
I don't disagree with that AT ALL. Urbanites are ruining the planet, not
rural people. I grew up on a farm and only live in an urban hive to make
a living- once I retire I'm outta here and they can HAVE the stinking
place. I'm just repeating the report, and speculating on how the
environmentalists will spin it.
From: Steve on 20 Dec 2007 17:06
> "C. E. White" <cewhite3(a)removemindspring.com> wrote in message
>> I am not sure that ethanol is the answer, but I also think that the
>> anti-ethanol lobby is lying through their collective teeth. I know who
>> is funding the pro-ethanol lobby. Who is funding the anti-ethanol
>> lobby? I'd say follow the money......Who stands to loose the most if
>> ethanol displaces a significant amount of foreign oil?
> Fully agree with this, Ed. Everybody has a different axe to grind in this
No, a lot of us just think that ethanol as a widely-used replacement for
gasoline is not viable for North America when you balance the energy
budget. I personally, however, think bioDIESEL has an enormous
potential. The difference is that far less energy is required to extract
corn oil from corn (or other plant oils from their parent plants) than
to distill ethanol from fermented corn.
It still doesn't alleviate the problem with food crop being displaced
for fuel crop while much of the world starves, and it doesn't make a big
enough dent in oil demand because not enough of the automobile fleet is
diesel powered... but I just want to point out that in my case its not a
matter of "follow the money" at all.
From: Frank on 20 Dec 2007 18:54
C. E. White wrote:
> "Scott Dorsey" <kludge(a)panix.com> wrote in message
>> Yes, thinking about ethanol as a petroleum replacement is silly. It
>> doesn't work out, costing more to make than you get out of it.
> Not true. See Brazil. And even if you use corn (not as cost effective
> as sugar cane), most people who say it doesn't provide a net energy
> benefit ignore the fact that the residue left over after you make
> ethanol is a high quality animal feed, in some way superior to the
> original corn. And if/when a process for making ethanol from grass /
> wood chips / whatever is commercialized, ethanol will be relatively
> Ed White
Believe there is something like a 50 cent a gallon import tax on
ethanol. Otherwise it would be cheaper for US to buy from Brazil than
make our own. Chalk another one up to ADM ;(