If you are anti-ethanol, please read the following VERY carefully

[eb110americana]

Originally Posted by E-Flex

The point about ethanol is not what happens on farms in the US, where very few farmers could easily feed the whole nation.

The point is that it is tempting to have badly paid farmers in third world countries produce cheap ethanol for highly developed countries instead of food for their fellow countrymen. Since third world countries usually lack the money to import their food from abroad, this will lead to people famishing for the sake of cheap fuel.

If you can produce all the ethanol you need in the US, and if you are ready to pay for it, please go ahead. But importing it for cheap money from third world countries will lead to a complete disaster.

Originally Posted by Jimbus

But what you are not considering is that corn is a commodity traded in a market. Statistics and truth really have nothing to do with prices. My brother-in-law, who farms in nw PA, contracted preseason at just under $2.5 a bushel. He got over $4 a bushel post contract and the people he sold it to said it was because of the rush for ethanol.

It doesn't matter that ethanol uses a fraction of the corn production, prices are all about speculation. Oil prices are through the roof right now for no other reason than speculation. Keep this in mind, too, there was an article about some third world country making tens of thousands or millions of acres available to grow bio-fuel crops... this is probably code for clear cutting rain forest.

These are both very real concerns. (1) How do we avoid diverting ethanol crops from staple foods in parts of the world where exchange rates make everything cheap? And (2) How do we regulate new ethanol farming outside of our borders to prevent depletion of natural resources like the rain forest?

The problem lies in the over-simplification whereby ethanol use in general is called into question simply due to its proximity to these two issues. Since, at least at current levels, ethanol production has no effect on corn prices for food, that argument clearly holds no water. However, we are likely to see the argument that ethanol use will divert 3rd world food sources and lead to rain forest destruction--therefore we should not use ethanol.

That is total nonsense, however, as it is confusing the issues as I said above: The problem lies in the over-simplification whereby ethanol use in general is called into question simply due to its proximity to these two issues. Instead of dumping ethanol altogether, we should avoid importing from countries without laws to protect their forests and food sources. In other words, the problem is not ethanol, but rather the actions of those we import from. In fact, I recall reading an article from somewhere in Europe where they were specifically making policy to only import from countries where deforestation was not involved.

This reminds me of the same blanket paranoia and oversimplification that leads to our current "no cloning or cloning research" policy. People are afraid of a variant of identity theft whereby illegal copies of them are being made, or afraid that someone who would use the technology to breed an army of themselves, or other such sci-fi nonsense. First off, cloning doesn't work that way. Clones age at the same rate as normal people and must still be birthed, raised, and mothered like a normal child in the same fashion as artificial insemination. Clones also are not direct copies, they have different personalities in the same way that identical twins do. Secondly, cloning could have led to direct replacement organs for people who need them instead of years-long organ transplant waiting lists for something that might be rejected in the end anyway. Instead, we should have banned the things people object to: namely illegal cloning without consent, cloning in great numbers, or genetically accelerated development--on anyone, clone or not. There are probably other examples of this phenomenon, but this was the first that sprang to mind.

[KingElvis]

Wow Ron.

Wow.

A report from "BioFuels Digest" contests the simple fact that any food resource funnelled into bio fuels will ultimately mean less food than if there were no biofuels?

Wow.

It's like quoting "Das Kapital" on why Communism is inevitable.

[Hunid Racks]

Originally Posted by Ed Arcuri

Perhaps, but all the evidence is to the contrary. We import a lot of goods from China, Japan, Korea, Germany,the rest of Europe, Canada, Mexico . . . stop me when I get to a country that has gotten poorer as a result of trade.

How about us?

No way, no how will anybody convince me or anybody else that sees the stats of how currency is being manipulated by some nations that it is for our benefit. You run a surplus with the world's largest market and then devalue your currency, you are directly using your surplus to pay that devaluation. And China and especially Japan are doing exactly that.

Trouble is, we have some of the worst representation in government. Both the Demlicans and Repulicrats will tell us how protectionism is evil. Doesn't matter to them. But if they grew spines and ignored "their" party line, maybe they could do something for the people that elect them. Protectionism is a great growth strategy. It's been working fine for everybody that uses it to access the US market.

[HoosierRon]

Originally Posted by KingElvis

Wow Ron.

Wow.

A report from "BioFuels Digest" contests the simple fact that any food resource funnelled into bio fuels will ultimately mean less food than if there were no biofuels?

Wow.

It's like quoting "Das Kapital" on why Communism is inevitable.

Way to attack the messenger and ignore the facts and arguments contained therein.

Your post is very convincing.

If I were to attack "Das Kapital", the argument would be something other than "it was written by a dead white guy."

[MoonShiner Tn]

Your singing my song HoosierRon, Hiccup oh sorry. I still get better mileage without the corn blend. And walk straighter too boot.

[HoosierRon]

Originally Posted by MoonShiner Tn

Your singing my song HoosierRon, Hiccup oh sorry. I still get better mileage without the corn blend. And walk straighter too boot.

Just for you...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_n9prNixjbg

+ YouTube Video

[MoonShiner Tn]

I thank ya very much for it

[BBDOS CV8]

Are the food shortage riots and famines in developing countries just because the US diverted a percent of it's corn production to ethanol? Probably not. But that certainly didn't help the situation. Regardless of where the corn is grown or where it ends up, it all affects the ability of the poor to eat if the pool of available corn for food is reduced and price goes up. Regardless of currency manipulation, evil regimes, corrupt foreigners or the WTO this is an undeniable fact.

I'm all for cellulolistic ethanol provided it is not a negative impact in toxicity or some other way. But distilled ethanol from corn mash is a bad case of robbing Peter to pay Paul in terms of using one form of energy to make expensive fuel and thereby effectively doubling the environmental impact of it, which is an abuse of resources and a hit to the environment none of us can afford.

It is also a terrible case of reverse Robin Hood, robbing the poor of more affordable food so rich nations can drive inefficient vehicles more cheaply. It is morally and ethically untenable.

And it isn't just the US. Brazil is a worse offender, clearing rainforests and turning tribesmen into farmer paeons; locked into a wage-slave existance growing sugar for fuel. Not to mention destroying something that doesn't belong to just them, in the Amazon basin, but really to the whole planet.

[GMusa]

Originally Posted by SuperSS27

Problem or strength?

If they can feed them all... strength!

[D C]

Simple solution. Sell less corn to China & charge them through the nose for it.

[E-Flex]

Originally Posted by HoosierRon

The U.S. imports very little ethanol.

A very good position to start from. Please make sure it remains like this when there is a considerable number of ethanol-driven cars on American roads.

[E-Flex]

Originally Posted by Ed Arcuri

. . . stop me when I get to a country that has gotten poorer as a result of trade.

There are, for example, Ethiopia and Eritrea, who continuously ran into famine in the 1980s because they sold all their food to buy weapons for threatening each other.

I do not claim that trade in general is a bad thing. As you mentioned, my own country got very rich that way. But I do claim there are things that should not be done, and growing ethanol in poor countries to export it to rich countries (this includes th EU as well!) is one of them.

[E-Flex]

Originally Posted by HotCarNut

The US is one of the largest exporters of corn worldwide. Why would we bother importing ethanol when we can simply keep the corn here and convert it? We have the most capacity for ethanol production from corn (Brazil's is almost entirely sugar-cane based) and it drastically lowers the cost since we aren't paying out the @ss to ship it. If you want to complain about something, gripe that we won't be giving freebies to half the ****ing world. Maybe Germany should spend less on socialist programs at home and contribute more the the world food bank. That seems to be what you're suggesting the US do.

All I am suggesting is not to import ethanol from third world countries. And I never claimed things went any better over here, so calm down.

[CaptainDan]

Originally Posted by Hunid Racks

....Trouble is, we have some of the worst representation in government.......

Someone needs to get out more.

Worst representation in government? Compared to who? Nobody?

Reminds me of Churchill's famous quote:
"Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."

[CaptainDan]

Originally Posted by E-Flex

The point about ethanol is not what happens on farms in the US, where very few farmers could easily feed the whole nation.

The point is that it is tempting to have badly paid farmers in third world countries produce cheap ethanol for highly developed countries instead of food for their fellow countrymen. Since third world countries usually lack the money to import their food from abroad, this will lead to people famishing for the sake of cheap fuel.

If you can produce all the ethanol you need in the US, and if you are ready to pay for it, please go ahead. But importing it for cheap money from third world countries will lead to a complete disaster.

Third world countries aren't starving because they can't produce or import enough food. They starve because they don't have MONEY. How cheap or how available food is doesn't matter if you can't afford to buy it at ANY price. No money buys no food.

Buying ethanol (or oil, or cars, or cheese crackers, or whatever) from them can help make a poor country into a rich country. Or at least a moderately prosperous one. Then they CAN get food.