|
Isn't
it time for Second Thoughts on the Ethanol Mandate?
April
10, 2008
We live in troubled times, all over
the country people are losing their homes and being kicked out
onto the streets. Gas prices are well over $3 dollars a gallon
and
may
reach $4 by the end of 2008. The cost of diesel fuel
needed by the trucking industry is driving the small operators
out of business. The large corporate trucking industry simply
pass on the cost of moving freight to the consumer, that's me
and you. This is only one of the reasons that food prices are
soaring with no end in sight.
The media reports, there
is a crude oil shortage in the world and part of the problem is
the growing economies in China and India. They are buying up
huge supplies of crude on the open market, thus accelerating the
crises. If this is true, then why have we done so little to
develop other sources of clean renewable energy? Oh, I forgot
about Ethanol, silly me.
The U.S government has
provided tax breaks and start up funding for Ethanol and
Biodesel plants, but the results are not very favorable at all.
It seems to me that every time the Federal Government
gets involved it creates more of a problem, this time with out
of control food prices along with soaring energy prices. Before
President Bush signed the
Ethanol
Mandate into law in 2005, there were plenty of independent
studies that showed it would never work. For corn farmers, the
mandate has exceeded their wildest dreams, but for consumers, it
has been an expensive double whammy. Higher costs to get to the
supermarket and sharply higher prices once you get there.
ScienceDaily
(Jul. 6, 2005)— ITHACA, N.Y. -- Turning plants such
as corn, soybeans and sunflower into fuel uses much more energy
than the resulting ethanol or biodiesel generates, according to
a new Cornell University and University of California-Berkeley
study.
Here's another independent study: Published on
April 1, 2005 by
Science
Daily: Ethanol Production Consumes Six Units Of Energy To
Produce Just One. UC Berkeley bioengineering professor Tad W.
Patzek thinks that's a very bad idea.
For two years,
Patzek has analyzed the environmental ramifications of ethanol,
a renewable fuel that many believe could significantly reduce
our dependence on petroleum-based fossil fuels. According to
Patzek though, ethanol may do more harm than good."In terms
of renewable fuels, ethanol is the worst solution," Patzek
says. "It has the highest energy cost with the least
benefit.” Plus, it will create a shortage that will drive
up food prices and will hurt the poorest people at home and
around the world.
Now lets jump to 2008.
read full article
|
 .
This site is Under Construction, and some
links do not work. Please check back later.
|
|
2008 James Itterly - Princeton, Minnesota. All rights reserved.