I'm a biofuels skeptic, but these studies aren't the end of the story. The 
increase in carbon they cite comes from increased food production in other 
parts of the world to make up for corn that goes for ethanol here. By that same 
logic 1) meat-eating is a far worse problem, since it takes about eight times 
as much grain to produce a pound of animal protein as for humans as compared 
with the original grain, and 2) any conversion of arable land to anything else 
-- houses, Wal-marts, roads, whatever -- is also worse than ethanol production, 
since it displaces food production AND generates no fuel. There is truth to all 
of this, but it is not the whole truth.

What is true, I think, is that Midwestern states (and carmakers; witness GM's 
big push for E85) so far have put too much emphasis on ethanol and not enough 
on VMT reduction. Maybe we will get to a cellulosic nirvanna state, where 
biofuels clearly do improve our carbon situation, and maybe corn ethanol is a 
bridge to that. But clearly we've been too ready to pump up ethanol production 
and think we're making a big difference. We're not.

Eric Sundquist

----- Original Message ----
From: Tim Wong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Eric Westhagen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; BikiesSubmissions <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 8, 2008 6:14:43 PM
Subject: Re: [Bikies] Twice as injurious to World!


It's 
hardly 
a 
secret 
that 
ethanol 
is 
basically 
a 
cash 
cow 
for 
Archer 
Daniels 
Midland 
and 
the 
other 
agribusine$$ 
giants.  
What 
I 
can't 
figure 
out 
is 
why 
anyone 
with 
an 
IQ 
above 
about 
40 
falls 
for 
it.  
We 
will 
all 
soon 
start 
seeing 
big 
beer 
price 
increases, 
as 
land 
is 
shifted 
from 
barley 
to 
GM 
corn.

"It 
is 
dangerous 
to 
be 
right 
in 
matters 
on 
which 
the 
established 
authorities 
are 
wrong."--Voltaire 
(1694-1778)
Direct 
Cost 
of 
U.S. 
War 
and 
Occupation 
of 
Iraq
$490,171,701,658





>>> 
Eric 
Westhagen 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
2/8/2008 
5:58 
PM 
>>>
Dear 
Group,

Typical 
of 
pop 
science 
and 
"interested 
monied" 
conclusions, 
the 
BIO 
FUELS
world 
business 
was 
EXPOSED 
on 
the 
NBC 
nightly 
news 
to 
injure 
the
"environment" 
twice 
as 
much 
as 
total 
gasoline 
usage.  
I 
would 
expect 
"each
side" 
of 
the 
question 
has 
a 
"hundred 
qualification" 
and 
some 
retorts 
will
appear 
here 
to 
this 
post 
of 
mine.

And 
that 
doesn't 
even 
take 
into 
account 
what 
the 
high 
corn 
price 
has 
done
to 
the 
poor 
of 
Mexico 
and 
has 
further 
driven 
them 
across 
the 
border.

Nice 
going 
Al 
Gore 
and 
government 
encouragement.

Eric 
Westhagen

_______________________________________________
Bikies 
mailing 
list
[email protected] 
http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies

_______________________________________________
Bikies 
mailing 
list
[email protected]
http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies



_______________________________________________
Bikies mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies

Reply via email to