Jeff Goodell (see Grist interview) is apparently incapable of writing anything I don't love. The latest is a piece in Rolling Stone called "Ethanol Scam."
It's downright shrill! Here's what Goodell has to say about the ethanol hype:
This is not just hype -- it's dangerous, delusional bullshit. Ethanol doesn't burn cleaner than gasoline, nor is it cheaper. Our current ethanol production represents only 3.5 percent of our gasoline consumption -- yet it consumes twenty percent of the entire U.S. corn crop, causing the price of corn to double in the last two years and raising the threat of hunger in the Third World. And the increasing acreage devoted to corn for ethanol means less land for other staple crops, giving farmers in South America an incentive to carve fields out of tropical forests that help to cool the planet and stave off global warming.
So why bother? Because the whole point of corn ethanol is not to solve America's energy crisis, but to generate one of the great political boondoggles of our time. Corn is already the most subsidized crop in America, raking in a total of $51 billion in federal handouts between 1995 and 2005 -- twice as much as wheat subsidies and four times as much as soybeans. Ethanol itself is propped up by hefty subsidies, including a fifty-one-cent-per-gallon tax allowance for refiners. And a study by the International Institute for Sustainable Development found that ethanol subsidies amount to as much as $1.38 per gallon -- about half of ethanol's wholesale market price.
(And yes, he addresses cellulosic.)
As Robert Rapier points out, this quote from Dave Juday -- about the Senate's recently passed 36 billion gallon ethanol mandate -- is hilarious:
"It's like trying to solve a traffic problem by mandating hovercraft. Except we don't have hovercraft."
This one's a must read.
Corn-based meat and ethanol: burning the planet to a crisp
Comments
View as Flat
naturescene Posted 11:29 am
01 Aug 2007
Permalink
Karen Lee Orr Posted 12:25 pm
01 Aug 2007
When I first subscribed, most of the articles were agrofuel business promotions and pro-agrofuel editorials.
Now I receive so many good, solid, anti-agrofuel articles, I can hardly keep up with them.
Below are links to two good agrofuel articles that came out in the last few days. One is from The Asia Times and the other from The Washington Post.
"Big Oil is one of the major engines driving the biofuels bandwagon. Measuring all energy inputs to produce ethanol, from production of nitrogen fertilizer to energy needed to clean the considerable waste from biofuel refineries, they use more energy than they produce. That translates into huge profit for clever oil giants that re-profile themselves as "green energy" producers.
So it's little wonder that ExxonMobil, Chevron and BP are all into biofuels. This past May, BP announced the largest ever research-and-development grant to a university, $500 million to the University of California-Berkeley, to fund BP-dictated R&D into alternative energy, including biofuels. Stanford University's Global Climate and Energy Program got $100 million from ExxonMobil; University of California-Davis got $25 million from Chevron for its Bio-energy Research Group. Princeton University's Carbon Mitigation Initiative takes $15 million from BP."
The Great Biofuel Fraud:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/IH01Dj01.html ...
"There was already a race for Brazilian ethanol, and President Bush's
announcements gave more credibility to the process," said Roberto
Rodrigues, former Brazilian agriculture minister, who formed the
Interamerican Ethanol Commission with former Florida governor Jeb Bush
in December.
Losing Forests to Fuel Cars
Ethanol Sugarcane Threatens Brazil's Wooded Savanna
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007 ...
Permalink
justlou Posted 9:02 pm
01 Aug 2007
I have been saying much the same here for a few weeks. The more I learn the more dire the situation looks. The numbers in the WAPO article are staggering.
The policy this country has set in legislation is leading much of this destruction. And it is very sad to see such "progressive" people like George Soros funding this blind stampede along with the likes of Cargill.
This is INSANE! and we need to be MAD!
Permalink
naturescene Posted 10:11 pm
01 Aug 2007
Permalink
alphaniner Posted 11:51 pm
01 Aug 2007
Permalink
naturescene Posted 12:01 am
02 Aug 2007
Permalink
mpeppard Posted 4:30 am
02 Aug 2007
all energy is heavily subsidized - oil, nuclear, solar and wind
increased prices for subsized American corn will HELP small farmers in the developing world who can't make a living because of American agricultural products undercutting them in price
if corn ethanol can jump start the ethanol industry to the point where cellulose ethanol production is embraced then I say it's worth it
for years enviro's have been touting ethanol and now we're railing against it! no wonder big business is able to keep the environmental movement at bay...how about suggesting solutions such as a move towards biodiesel or the use of waste products only in the production of ethanol. solutions are just as important as criticisms
The U.S. is not the only country on the planet so dumping on subsized U.S. biofuels shouldn't be extended across the board
Permalink
naturescene Posted 4:51 am
02 Aug 2007
Ending all subsidies for energy is the way to go
Raising US corn prices might help some developing farmers, but it will also harm low-end consumers who live off corn-based staple foods.
Corn ethanol can have devastating effects on aquatic systems due to the fertilizer required. Is that worth it?
Maybe enviros did tout ethanol. Some people (notably environmental economists) have been warning about ethanol the entire time. It's just that now people are choosing to listen.
Permalink
GreyFlcn Posted 6:02 am
02 Aug 2007
http://greyfalcon.net/biotaxes.png
2. The raising corn prices does not help small farmers, it hurts small farmers. It does help massive farmers though, but they don't really need any help to begin with.
http://greyfalcon.net/farmers2
http://greyfalcon.net/farmers
3. Cellulosic Ethanol is worse than Corn Ethanol in GHG emmisions.
http://jeq.scijournals.org/cgi/content/full/35/1/3
http://www.ars.usda.gov/research/publications/Publication ...
http://www.biofuelwatch.org.uk/inf_paper_2g-bfs.pdf
And both of which are pointless money pits.
http://greyfalcon.net/ethanol.png
http://greyfalcon.net/sugarsolar
4. "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do sir?" -Keynes You don't continue to plow your head into a brick wall after you find out, "Hey maybe thats not such a good idea".
Thats the kind of Leadership we've come to enjoy in Iraq. Are you saying that the proper way to move forward?
Permalink
libertyvini Posted 10:17 pm
30 Aug 2007
libertyguys
have been saying this for a couple of years, here and elsewhere;"Why Ethanol Will Never Economically Replace Gasoline"
Now if we could just get people to apply the same skepticism to corporate pledges to curb global warming! People, Big Business and Big Government LOVE to stampede the herd into policies that sound appealing but are really just boodoggles designed to enrichen them and screw you and me.
Vince Daliessio
http://www.libertyguys.org
Permalink