The Issue of Ethanol

[jdobbin]

Overall, consumer prices for food consumed at home in Canada have risen only 1.2% in the 12 months ending in April 2008....Statcan

http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/080612/d080612a.htm

I don't see what the big deal is

Reading further, it indicates that Canada has been able to weather increases this year only due to the fact that the dollar has risen.

Fact of the matter is that 5% ethanol mandates means that even more grain goes to fuel and costs for feedstock and for food production. Costs in those areas have gone up a lot higher than 1.2%.

Edited June 12, 2008 by jdobbin

[TOhasCLASS]

Fact - Big Oil is behind the propaganda that biofuels would impact world food supply ?

Fact - Methonal can be created with any organic matter (i.e. corn stalks and husks, non-food) which could be grown in area where non-food organic matter is the only use for the land

Fact - Big Oil killed the electric car and now want to kill biofeuls

Fact - Biofeuls are a transition fuel source toalieviate the need for 100% oil dependance

Fact - Biofuels would take money from OPEC and big oil and distribute money to third world farmers

[jdobbin]

Fact - Big Oil is behind the propaganda that biofuels would impact world food supply ?

Fact - One third of the U.S. corn supply goes to fuel now.

[TOhasCLASS]

Fact - One third of the U.S. corn supply goes to fuel now.

FACT - There is no need for using corn when Methonal can be created from organic non-food scrap.

The technology is there ... the US is wasting good food crops then ! Not sure how many times I have to explain it .... Big Oil always leads governments down a path where they know they have the upper hand.

Ever hear of lobbyists ... the reason why the US is gouged on drug prices while Canadians drugs are called inferior and dangerous ( hello your drugs are identical to ours in every way )

Wake up Sheep

[jdobbin]

FACT - There is no need for using corn when Methonal can be created from organic non-food scrap.

The technology is there ... the US is wasting good food crops then ! Not sure how many times I have to explain it .... Big Oil always leads governments down a path where they know they have the upper hand.

I don't think it is oil companies that are supporting the food for fuel craze. It is politicians of every stripe thinking it kills two bird with one stone on the environment and farm support.

[TOhasCLASS]

I don't think it is oil companies that are supporting the food for fuel craze. It is politicians of every stripe thinking it kills two bird with one stone on the environment and farm support.

Ahh ... nothing is as it appears on the surface ... do some digging and you will find that big oil spends money on biofuel research, hydrogen fuel cells etc. .... ohh but what a pitty their investments can't seem to make it viable to compete with oil.

The reason why you don't believe me is because if big oil always lurks behind in the shadows working the room with little fan fare ... it wouldn't be in their best interest. it only takes a few in the pocket politicians to do their bidding

[jdobbin]

Ahh ... nothing is as it appears on the surface ... do some digging and you will find that big oil spends money on biofuel research, hydrogen fuel cells etc. .... ohh but what a pitty their investments can't seem to make it viable to compete with oil.

The reason why you don't believe me is because if big oil always lurks behind in the shadows working the room with little fan fare ... it wouldn't be in their best interest. it only takes a few in the pocket politicians to do their bidding

Well, that would mean all the parties then: Liberal, Conservative, Bloc, NDP and Green.

[TOhasCLASS]

Well, that would mean all the parties then: Liberal, Conservative, Bloc, NDP and Green.

you are bang on

[CoachCartman]

re-copied article DELETED by moderator

hoosieragtoday

http://www.hoosieragtoday.com/wire/comment...cret_193607.php

Edited June 12, 2008 by Charles Anthony
copied article deleted

[jdobbin]

you are bang on

And you are saying they are controlled by big oil?

[TOhasCLASS]

And you are saying they are controlled by big oil?

Yes ... but not in a direct in your face way ...

How do you think the drug companies in the US are able overcharge for medications .. lobbyists who wine and dine important senators, important medical people who influence decisions.

What I am saying is the oil companies employ lobbyists, scientists who support their views and people who represent themselves as credible voices against the technologies oil would be afraid of to influence the politicians on one side and manufacturers & consumers on the other. So you have politicians who change the current society we live in pick and choose who they believe.

If you are a self absorbed politician who doesn't have the time to research in great detail every societal problem and it's solution

Who are you going to believe the independant scientist who presents the oil alternative backed by a shoe string budget from power point on his lap top or A big oil back scientist who is employed for years with limitless funding making a six figure salary outlaying his beliefs at a posh function / seminar at the Ritz in NY with a round of Golf after the event.

[jdobbin]

Yes ... but not in a direct in your face way ...

Well given the price fixing we are seeing, it in in your face in some regards.

As for the bio-fuels argument you make, I'm not sure it is just oil companies that are suggesting that food for fuel is a bad idea.

[blueblood]

I am against public funding things that do more harm than good. Ethanol falls into that category. It is bad for the environment and produces more carbon than it saves.

If they have to be subsidized to support them and harm the environment, no.

Low taxation is not the same as direct subsidies to industry.

Gimme a break. This is your answer? How about we just pull the plug on ethanol subsidy and you can grow what you want based on actual market prices?

It doesn't help the environment. That claims is totally bogus and more and more people are starting to realize that food for fuel hurts more people than helps.

Ethanol is not going to be a solution for farmers long term prospects. It certainly doesn't help the environment and link after link is showing that. Food for fuel is terrible plan and one that politicians will soon abandon when prices start hurting other parts of the economy.

Just today John McCain said that ethanol subsidies should end.

http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/stor...09/daily52.html

Does this mean farmers will now support Barack Obama?

The U.S. government is saying that gas prices would be 20 to 35 cents higher without ethanol but the damage it is doing to major production companies is influencing the election campaign. Tyson, Kellog and Pilgrim Pride are protesting ethanol.

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/govt...&dist=msr_1

More and more polling is showing both Americans and Canadians reducing their support for ethanol.

Yes reducing oil consumption is bad for the environment, you said it yourself gas in the states is 20-35 cents cheaper.

Farmers have been told to solve their own ag income crisis that went on a few years ago, well we have a right to say where our tax dollars go, we have exercised that right, and we have fixed that problem. Had we had help from urban areas back then ethanol might not exist today. On that note, when the Liberals get into office, they will (might) implement their daycare plan. I don't believe it's necessary and I believe it is a bad idea, and I don't want my tax dollars going to something that people can start up themselves without subsidies, after all demand for daycare is sky high; sound familiar? Daycare is in the same boat as ethanol.

How about farmers pull the plug on their vast sums of increased value of property tax going to the provincial government. We pay taxes, we want our tax dollars to work for us too. Ethanol companies have every right to buy grain, they are part of the market and improve it. Who gets my grain, the person who pays or who doesn't? Why should I operate at a loss so you can have cheap food?

Major companies also support the ethanol plan, ADM comes to mind, Cargill, Monsanto.

High commodity prices are bad for the economy? Take a look at our dollar and take a drive out to Sask, NFLD, Alberta, and Western Manitoba.

John McCain is full of it as Barack Obama was concerning NAFTA, he'd have to answer for cutting jobs when the economy is hurting. Also have to answer for higher gas prices when they could be lower. Higher energy prices are a bigger concern in the U.S. than "fuel for food".

Link

Ethanol continues to get better and better.

The only way urban Canadians are going to get cheap food and cheap energy is if they go to China and India and somehow convince the people there that they have to go back to living in squalor so that Urban Canadians can live like kings. Canada is doing the smart thing and cashing in on this.

The amish people also don't go to the grocery store or use energy. Don't like high prices, that's the alternative.

[jdobbin]

Yes reducing oil consumption is bad for the environment, you said it yourself gas in the states is 20-35 cents cheaper.

Where is the reduction on oil consumption? Haven't see it yet.

Farmers have been told to solve their own ag income crisis that went on a few years ago, well we have a right to say where our tax dollars go, we have exercised that right, and we have fixed that problem. Had we had help from urban areas back then ethanol might not exist today. On that note, when the Liberals get into office, they will (might) implement their daycare plan. I don't believe it's necessary and I believe it is a bad idea, and I don't want my tax dollars going to something that people can start up themselves without subsidies, after all demand for daycare is sky high; sound familiar? Daycare is in the same boat as ethanol.

Well, you've never voted for the any party but parties on the right so what does it matter anyway?

How about farmers pull the plug on their vast sums of increased value of property tax going to the provincial government. We pay taxes, we want our tax dollars to work for us too. Ethanol companies have every right to buy grain, they are part of the market and improve it. Who gets my grain, the person who pays or who doesn't? Why should I operate at a loss so you can have cheap food?

Why should we in the city pay tax to make you rich?

Major companies also support the ethanol plan, ADM comes to mind, Cargill, Monsanto.

Yes, we have seen that. Grain companies.

High commodity prices are bad for the economy? Take a look at our dollar and take a drive out to Sask, NFLD, Alberta, and Western Manitoba.

Didn't say that. I said high commodity prices mean farmers don't need subsidies.

John McCain is full of it as Barack Obama was concerning NAFTA, he'd have to answer for cutting jobs when the economy is hurting. Also have to answer for higher gas prices when they could be lower. Higher energy prices are a bigger concern in the U.S. than "fuel for food".

Really. Seems people are starting to note that having more than a third of the corn crop and having that numbers increase is not good. Food for fuel is an issue.

Link

Ethanol continues to get better and better.

The only way urban Canadians are going to get cheap food and cheap energy is if they go to China and India and somehow convince the people there that they have to go back to living in squalor so that Urban Canadians can live like kings. Canada is doing the smart thing and cashing in on this.

The amish people also don't go to the grocery store or use energy. Don't like high prices, that's the alternative.

Your link didn't work.

Ethanol using food for fuel is the wrong choice and the U.S. is lower the subsidy.

Obama is in favour of the subsidy but he is coming under increased pressures by many groups for his stand.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25324195/

Many economists, consumer advocates, environmental experts and tax groups have been critical of corn ethanol programs as a boondoggle that benefits agribusiness conglomerates more than small farmers. Those complaints have intensified recently as corn prices have risen sharply in tandem with oil prices and corn normally used for food stock has been diverted to ethanol production.

“If you want to take some of the pressure off this market, the obvious thing to do is lower that tariff and let some Brazilian ethanol come in,” said C. Ford Runge, an economist specializing in commodities and trade policy at the Center for International Food and Agricultural Policy at the University of Minnesota . “But one of the fundamental reasons biofuels policy is so out of whack with markets and reality is that interest group politics have been so dominant in the construction of the subsidies that support it.”

Edited June 23, 2008 by jdobbin

[TOhasCLASS]

Unfortunatly the average farmer is squeezed by the commodities middle man who makes all the coin .... also it is these same commodities distributors who buy up small farmers and create corporate farms.

While I agree we should protect the family farmer ..... the corporate farmer needs to be treated aas a different case.

The key is to make Methonol from the organic scraps ... that way we will not need to use food for fuel ...

[blueblood]

Where is the reduction on oil consumption? Haven't see it yet.

Well, you've never voted for the any party but parties on the right so what does it matter anyway?

Why should we in the city pay tax to make you rich?

Yes, we have seen that. Grain companies.

Didn't say that. I said high commodity prices mean farmers don't need subsidies.

Really. Seems people are starting to note that having more than a third of the corn crop and having that numbers increase is not good. Food for fuel is an issue.

Link

Your link didn't work.

Ethanol using food for fuel is the wrong choice and the U.S. is lower the subsidy.

Obama is in favour of the subsidy but he is coming under increased pressures by many groups for his stand.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25324195/

That link didn't work, for crap sakes. Here's the skinny; In an Ontario plant they are planning to use dried distillers grains which is waste product from ethanol to be used in coal fired plants instead of coal.

The reduction in oil consumption is where you pointed out that gas is 20-35 cents cheaper in the states with ethanol.

By your logic why should farmers pay sky high property taxes to make doctors and university profs rich? And with incoming daycare, daycare centre owners rich?

Farmers aren't actually the primary benefactor of the subsidies, it is the ethanol companies, who like daycare centres need the subsidies to start up business; we just benefit from them with higher grain prices, which in turn benefits the whole ag biz chain which is Canada's third largest employer, thus benefitting the economy, plus helps out rural Canada in the process.

I watch quite a bit of CNN which I consider fairly mainstream U.S., and they don't talk about the food vs. fuel. They talk about rising energy costs making things more expensive.

[jdobbin]

That link didn't work, for crap sakes. Here's the skinny; In an Ontario plant they are planning to use dried distillers grains which is waste product from ethanol to be used in coal fired plants instead of coal.

I have no problem with that. That is an actual waste product rather than taking corn and grain straight off the field to process for fuel.

The reduction in oil consumption is where you pointed out that gas is 20-35 cents cheaper in the states with ethanol.

At the cost of more carbon produced and no real emissions reductions which has also been pointed out.

By your logic why should farmers pay sky high property taxes to make doctors and university profs rich? And with incoming daycare, daycare centre owners rich?

I know the right wing hates all those things but please try to keep focused on why ethanol was being supported: it was an alternative fuel program that was supposed to help the environment. Well, it doesn't. And the side effects from its support cause inflation.

Farmers aren't actually the primary benefactor of the subsidies, it is the ethanol companies, who like daycare centres need the subsidies to start up business; we just benefit from them with higher grain prices, which in turn benefits the whole ag biz chain which is Canada's third largest employer, thus benefitting the economy, plus helps out rural Canada in the process.

The program was never meant to help out farmers as its primary goal.

I watch quite a bit of CNN which I consider fairly mainstream U.S., and they don't talk about the food vs. fuel. They talk about rising energy costs making things more expensive.

Really? How about this?

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/business/...ref=videosearch

That was in April.

The link I just posted was from today.

And how about this from February?

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/02/2...iref=newssearch

True or False: It takes about seven barrels of oil to make eight barrels of ethanol.

The answer is: TRUE.

Can you believe that?

[blueblood]

I have no problem with that. That is an actual waste product rather than taking corn and grain straight off the field to process for fuel.

At the cost of more carbon produced and no real emissions reductions which has also been pointed out.

I know the right wing hates all those things but please try to keep focused on why ethanol was being supported: it was an alternative fuel program that was supposed to help the environment. Well, it doesn't. And the side effects from its support cause inflation.

The program was never meant to help out farmers as its primary goal.

Really? How about this?

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/business/...ref=videosearch

That was in April.

The link I just posted was from today.

And how about this from February?

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/02/2...iref=newssearch

Can you believe that?

Two stories is not a crisis. Every day they talk about high energy prices to the point where Iraq is hardly an issue.

The "problem" with the plant from Ontario is that it needs the ethanol plant to process the grain first to turn it into waste. Still comes off the field and now more energy made.

If the U.S. gov't is saying that fuel is 20-35 cents cheaper, how the heck does it use more oil to produce then? If it used more, logic says that gas should be more expensive.

[jdobbin]

Two stories is not a crisis. Every day they talk about high energy prices to the point where Iraq is hardly an issue.

Oh please. That is just a sampling of what is out there. The American campaign has the issue of ethanol playing some importance as Republicans and McCain take sides against it.

The Europeans have also started questioning the environmental benefits of seven barrels of oil to produce eight barrels of ethanol from food.

The "problem" with the plant from Ontario is that it needs the ethanol plant to process the grain first to turn it into waste. Still comes off the field and now more energy made.

So basically food for food to create actual waste. Nice.

If the U.S. gov't is saying that fuel is 20-35 cents cheaper, how the heck does it use more oil to produce then? If it used more, logic says that gas should be more expensive.

I've showed it takes seven barrels to produce eight of ethanol. That is not much of a savings.

It certainly isn't worth it environmentally when carbon is generated to produce carbon.

[blueblood]

Oh please. That is just a sampling of what is out there. The American campaign has the issue of ethanol playing some importance as Republicans and McCain take sides against it.

The Europeans have also started questioning the environmental benefits of seven barrels of oil to produce eight barrels of ethanol from food.

So basically food for food to create actual waste. Nice.

I've showed it takes seven barrels to produce eight of ethanol. That is not much of a savings.

It certainly isn't worth it environmentally when carbon is generated to produce carbon.

Watched CNN all day today, no food crisis, really hammering out the price of oil and the energy crunch. If there was a food crisis, it would be hammered out all day on CNN, it is not. That tells us we have a secure food supply and can use overproduction to make ethanol.

The Republicans are also wanting to drill off the east coast and ANWAR. That's their plan to solve the high cost of energy in the states. Most ag economists are confident that ethanol is not going anywhere, there is too much money to be passed up in it.

7 barrels to produce 8 of ethanol is a savings, and if they put the Dried distillers grains in coal power plants, the savings is even more, then use the stalks/stems even more savings. It's bad for the environment as well to just grow grain industrially and let it rot like we've been doing during the late nineties and early part of this decade.

If your beating the band about growing just food and saving the poor, lobby a liberal MP to get a subsidy in place so we can do that. Your position on agriculture is all over the place.

[jdobbin]

Watched CNN all day today, no food crisis, really hammering out the price of oil and the energy crunch. If there was a food crisis, it would be hammered out all day on CNN, it is not. That tells us we have a secure food supply and can use overproduction to make ethanol.

That's funny. I saw CNN talk about food crisis just this morning. They were talking about Oxfam's warning from the day before. The time it was on was about 10 AM central.

Maybe you didn't see Oxfam's announcement. It is right here.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/06/24/oxfam.b...iref=newssearch

They also mentioned how it would be an issue at the G8 meeting.

The Republicans are also wanting to drill off the east coast and ANWAR. That's their plan to solve the high cost of energy in the states. Most ag economists are confident that ethanol is not going anywhere, there is too much money to be passed up in it.

I'm not surprised ag economists think so. I wonder how consumers will react to more food being turned into fuel.

7 barrels to produce 8 of ethanol is a savings, and if they put the Dried distillers grains in coal power plants, the savings is even more, then use the stalks/stems even more savings. It's bad for the environment as well to just grow grain industrially and let it rot like we've been doing during the late nineties and early part of this decade.

It is not reducing demand for oil. It drives demand.

If your beating the band about growing just food and saving the poor, lobby a liberal MP to get a subsidy in place so we can do that. Your position on agriculture is all over the place.

How about I just lobby my MP to drop food for fuel ethanol like conservatives in the U.S. are doing.

[segnosaur]

You know, all this talk of ethanol may actually end up being pointless...

From : http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/envi...icle4133668.ece

...the genetic alteration of (bacteria) so that when they feed on agricultural waste such as woodchips or wheat straw, they do something extraordinary. They excrete crude oil.

...

The company is not interested in using corn as feedstock, given the much-publicised problems created by using food crops for fuel, such as the tortilla inflation that recently caused food riots in Mexico City. Instead, different types of agricultural waste will be used...

Granted, this is only in the early stages, and may not necessarily pan out. But think about what it would mean if they could get this to work on an industrial scale:

- No need for changes to our infrastructure (e.g. no 'ethanol' filling stations, no changes to the cars themselves)

- No conflict over food production

- No need to worry about greenhouse gases anymore

[blueblood]

That's funny. I saw CNN talk about food crisis just this morning. They were talking about Oxfam's warning from the day before. The time it was on was about 10 AM central.

Maybe you didn't see Oxfam's announcement. It is right here.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/06/24/oxfam.b...iref=newssearch

They also mentioned how it would be an issue at the G8 meeting.

I'm not surprised ag economists think so. I wonder how consumers will react to more food being turned into fuel.

It is not reducing demand for oil. It drives demand.

How about I just lobby my MP to drop food for fuel ethanol like conservatives in the U.S. are doing.

Hmm, must have been out for a sec. But one story vs. almost an entire day of oil scare and prices. Oil is a bigger concern than an apparent food shortage.

Consumers will react the same way as sky high oil prices. Consumers would be just as outraged as having sky high oil prices and finding out that we have a vast stockpile of waste grain that could be turned into fuel which would save money at the pumps, you said it saves 20 - 35 cents in the U.S.

If you think that grain farmers have not been growing crops for the last 20 years, that is wrong. Farmers have been growing vast amounts of grain and burning vast amounts of diesel fuel for the last 20 years, no matter who buys it is not going to change that.

If you don't mind putting plant workers out of work, devaluing one of our major exports, and higher fuel prices go ahead and lobby him. No politician is crazy enough to risk putting the food supply of his country at risk. Even GW. Unless the world substansially decreases it's hunger for energy, ethanol won't go away.

[jdobbin]

Granted, this is only in the early stages, and may not necessarily pan out. But think about what it would mean if they could get this to work on an industrial scale:

- No need for changes to our infrastructure (e.g. no 'ethanol' filling stations, no changes to the cars themselves)

- No conflict over food production

- No need to worry about greenhouse gases anymore

I like the no conflict over food production.

[jdobbin]

Hmm, must have been out for a sec. But one story vs. almost an entire day of oil scare and prices. Oil is a bigger concern than an apparent food shortage.

Consumers will react the same way as sky high oil prices. Consumers would be just as outraged as having sky high oil prices and finding out that we have a vast stockpile of waste grain that could be turned into fuel which would save money at the pumps, you said it saves 20 - 35 cents in the U.S.

And costs them more at the grocery store.

If you think that grain farmers have not been growing crops for the last 20 years, that is wrong. Farmers have been growing vast amounts of grain and burning vast amounts of diesel fuel for the last 20 years, no matter who buys it is not going to change that.

If you don't mind putting plant workers out of work, devaluing one of our major exports, and higher fuel prices go ahead and lobby him. No politician is crazy enough to risk putting the food supply of his country at risk. Even GW. Unless the world substansially decreases it's hunger for energy, ethanol won't go away.

Given that commodities are rising fast now even without ethanol, I don't buy the big fall off in price for farmers.

And I am not opposed to ethanol, just opposed to large and growing amount of food going into gas tanks with no end in sight.