Author Topic: Biofuel groups swing back at oil industry, defend federal blending mandate  (Read 677 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Rapunzel

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 71,719

Offline Rapunzel

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 71,719
Never mind it takes more energy to convert to energy and ruins out automobiles in the process... 

Offline Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 47,384
  • Chief Dork
Yeah, it's great taking food out of the mouths of poor hungry babes in order to line the pockets of the biofuels executives.

Offline truth_seeker

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 19,422
  • Common Sense Results Oriented Conservative Veteran
    • The place where argument addicts can go
If/when conventional oil is plentiful, it makes sense to scale back biofuels subsidies or eliminate them entirely.

Biofuels is a corn industry subsidy. Other crops have given way to subsidized corn for biofuels.

This is nothing more than subsidized corn industry lobbying.

The town I lived in as a child was at the time sugar beet country, but now is subsidized corn country. It is also among the Northern Colorado breakaway counties, claiming their conservative values.

I wonder if that means getting off the federal dole, too?

With the GOP doing so well in farm states, don't expect the elected reps to do the right thing, very easily.

That is politics.

"God must love the common man, he made so many of them.�  Abe Lincoln

Offline Rapunzel

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 71,719
Colorado is one of the fracking states...

Offline jmyrlefuller

  • Krampus
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 13,285
  • Angry goat-like creature
Quote
Biofuels is a corn industry subsidy. Other crops have given way to subsidized corn for biofuels.

This is nothing more than subsidized corn industry lobbying.
Indeed. The corn lobby-- thanks in large part to the corn-growing state of Iowa having the first spot on the political calendar and a firm swing-state status-- holds a lot of power in this country. That's part of the reason high-fructose corn syrup was the dominant sweetener the past couple decades (although that is changing as of late).

I used to be a believer in the whole concept of ethanol. Then I realized the effort needed to produce it in any mass quantity was not worth the trouble, at least using modern industrial machinery and techniques. At that point I realized it was nothing more than a corn-lobby racket.

Offline Rapunzel

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 71,719
It's a negative on so many levels.  Requires more energy to convert to to energy.  Damage to vehicles and downright devastating for marine vessels.  It's driven up the cost of beef, pork and poultry production as well as other food products and it is really hurting poor societies where corn is a staple of life. 

BTW his being honest about all this and lack of support for is what cost Rick Perry Iowa.... the ethanol industry went after him big-time.

Offline Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 47,384
  • Chief Dork
If/when conventional oil is plentiful, it makes sense to scale back biofuels subsidies or eliminate them entirely.

Biofuels is a corn industry subsidy. Other crops have given way to subsidized corn for biofuels.

This is nothing more than subsidized corn industry lobbying.

The town I lived in as a child was at the time sugar beet country, but now is subsidized corn country. It is also among the Northern Colorado breakaway counties, claiming their conservative values.

I wonder if that means getting off the federal dole, too?

With the GOP doing so well in farm states, don't expect the elected reps to do the right thing, very easily.

That is politics.



That is a very good question:  it's all well and good to say that your neighbor's ox should be gored, but it takes a lot of strength to stand by your principles when it's your ox that's to be gored.


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf