Great Editorial a Friend Just Wrote

[UrbanLogger]

This appeared in the Chattanoogan on June 21st. The writer is a good friend of mine . . .

Ethanolics Unanimous
posted June 21, 2007

Once again, we find our political leadership united around a very bad idea, ethanol and other biofuels to help gain "energy independence," to "help farmers" and most importantly, to help citizens avoid the harsh reality of peak oil converging with unsustainable lifestyles. It is understandable that the politicians must pander to the corn growing states in anticipation of election cycles. Politicians have always been prostitutes for votes. Even the most enlightened, progressive, and thoughtful of them have fallen prey to this cornographic behavior.

While some crops are superior to others and forest eating cellulostic ethanol technology scams are still in development, corn ethanol primacy is devouring the nation's alternative energy focus. Billions of taxpayer dollars are being thrown into this unsustainable technology and we subsidize each gallon of auto alcohol to the tune of 51 cents per gallon. The ethanol fumes are leaving us drunk on delusion, ignoring the consequences and refusing to face the future when the oil dries up.

To grow enough corn for ethanol to replace our oil addiction would require approximately 482 million acres of cropland, exceeding the current total of 434 million acres of cropland used for all food and fiber. This does not even account for projected growth of oil consumption in the U.S. There is already the push to put the marginal Conservation Reserve Program lands, vital for wildlife and water quality and quantity, into intense energy crop production.

Old school ethical farmers in the corn belt are already lamenting the destruction of soil saving windbreaks, some planted during the CCC years, the plowing under of hayfields to corn, highly erodable hilly lands being put into corn, and water drainages being reduced, hearkening back to the depression era insanity that squandered so much vital topsoil. Cellulostic ethanol scams will fare even worse for the soils as "residues" are scooped up, leaving virtually nothing to feed back to the soil.


"The nation that destroys its soil, destroys itself," said President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

In the rush to burn our nation's dwindling soil resources, corn is king. Corn devours soil nutrients at 12-20 times the rate of soil renewal, meaning it is already a highly unsustainable crop. Corn is also highly dependent on fossil fuel based fertilizer and pesticide inputs. With the inevitable hybridization and Genetically Modified Organism corn crops, the soil nutrient depletion will accelerate. The Corn Cartel, led by the likes of Archer Daniels Midland and Monsanto, have been working for decades on their plans for corn dominion over the U.S. and are now reaping record profits and subsidies.

Meanwhile, back on the farm, in addition to the land ethics meltdown, prime farmland prices have soared, rents have become prohibitive to all but the largest agribusiness operations, and again, the small farmers, the backbone, are being winnowed out like so much chaff. Seed, fuel and fertilizer costs are rising to meet the increased profit per bushel and farmers find themselves back on that familiar treadmill, the promise falling short as it always has.

In a land already plagued with poisoned groundwater, the incidence of atrazine and other poisons will only become more pervasive. Aquifers, already drained faster than recharge will only dry up faster in direct proportion to our ethanol consumption. It takes around 8,000 gallons of water to produce a gallon of ethanol from corn and each gallon of it leaves eight gallons of toxic waste sludge. Even in the land of 10,000 Lakes, Minnesota is experiencing water shortages from the ethanol production explosion. With 99% of corn production under intensive fossil fuel nitrogen fertilization regimes, there is a directly proportionate resulting contamination of surface and groundwater and growth of the dead zones where our rivers drain.

Depending on if you believe the science of the Corn Growers Association or scientists from Cornell University, corn will produce slightly more energy than is required to turn it into ethanol or substantially less. Having monitored the bioenergy crowd for a decade, repeated inquiries into true sustainability have been met with deafening silence. There is no ethanol plant in operation that can plant, grow, harvest, transport, process, and transport it's product on ethanol alone and still show a profit. It cannot be done given today's economics.

Ethanol also contains only 70% of the energy of gasoline. Therefore, it takes much more ethanol to go a hundred miles than it takes gas, undermining the 10 cent price difference at the pump that seems like you are saving money and the earth. Ethanol blends also evaporate far more readily causing a toxic nauseous moment at the pump and increasing ozone pollution. With the EPA poised to adjust ozone pollution standards to actually protect people, and Chattanooga's history of barely tolerable air, it is unconscionable for the ethanol bandwagon committee here to be falling for this scam.

Today, communities across the cornucopian landscape are fighting proposed ethanol plants on issues from water consumption, water quality, noxious fumes, noise, traffic safety, and other quality of life issues.

Meanwhile, back at the grocery store...

Do we feed cars or ourselves. To fuel the average American consumer's driving habits would require 11 acres of cropland per year, the same cropland that could feed seven people for a year. Already we've seen tortilla riots in Mexico and other places where corn is a food staple and the 60% price increase is prohibitive for the least affluent amongst us.

Ethanol primacy is in direct competition for the dairy and animal industry. In the US, the USDA projects that the wholesale price of chicken will be 10% higher this year, the price of eggs up 21%, milk 14%, beef 6% and this is only the beginning. Other food crops like soybeans, wheat, barley are being plowed under to feed cars instead. Already in Germany there is a shortage of barley leading the good Germans to fear for the future of their beer. In Mexico, blue agave tequila plantations are being burned and plowed under for corn, leaving those in Margaritaville far less happy while on vacation. And again, the small farmers of the US and elsewhere will be washed out as agribusiness always wins like the other Casinos do.

After we do the inevitable Enron-style bailout of the ethanol scamsters, we will be left with soils so depleted of basic nutrients, that any subsequent food production will be lower in nutrients, adversely affecting human and animal health and well being.

Indonesian and Brazilian rainforests are falling for ethanol and bioenergy production, slavery is making a comeback, peasants are being driven further into the forests, paramilitary corn cartels are stealing land in Columbia, endangered species are on the run and unmindful consumers of the over-developed world keep on consuming with nary a thought.

The ethanol scam will only accelerate global warming. As forests are cleared, more carbon is released than could ever possibly be avoided by burning ethanol. The mere act of using ethanol as a panacea to keep consumption and the American Weigh alive and unwell, will keep consumers unmindful and uncaring. Politically, that is what this whole snake/corn oil boondoggle is all about. To paraphrase the Jack Nicholson line..."We can't handle the truth..about corn, peak oil, unsustainable lifestyles and how we're ripping off future generations." The switchgrass crowd, biodiesel crowd, and others intent on devouring soil and landscapes, might be somewhat less devastating, but the same problems will exist to the degree that the earth's ability to support us declines and the other degrees continue to rise.

Now what...

If we poured trillions of dollars in subsidies to the oil and corn industries and untold resources into truly sustainable technologies, we could actually avert the worst case scenario of the end of oil and ensuing chaos and anarchy. Hard-Pour Cornography has us all cornfused for now, as our politicians and policies pander to the oil and corn cartels. Consumption based taxation on fuels, vastly improved mileage standards with current technology and technology in development, supporting improvements in solar, wind and storage technologies, car pooling, a conscientious and ethical public, combined with our ingenuity and technical prowess, we could develop truly sustainable options without a noticeable impact on our sacred standard of living like we're the only creatures on the planet.

There is a reason that Toyota is now the biggest auto dealer in the US...innovation and mileage. The Chevy Volt is promising to get 150 mpg, mostly driven by electricity. Solar technology is on the verge of becoming competitive to the earth raping, subsidized technologies of ripping mountain tops off for coal, mining and leaving nuclear waste for 10,000 generations to deal with, and oil wars that kill and maim millions. Decentralized solar and wind could power virtually all of our current home and transportation needs. If we quit driving our food an average of 1,500 miles per bite and bought locally, lived within our means as communities and individuals, we might find an actual higher quality of life as we re-create communities based on our old values of taking care of the planet for future generations, living by the golden rule, and being tough enough to figure things out and do right. Just sit down by your car and take a swig of your favorite ethanol beverage, share a shot with your SUV, and ponder ways to avert disaster and the bad-mouthing of us by who is left of posterity.

Denny Haldeman
Soddy Daisy
dennyh@bellsouth.net

[Dave Shepard]

Excellent article! Ethanol, in my opinion, is a very bad thing. It is not the boon most people think it is. Your friend made his point very clearly. I think too many people are looking for a one size fits all solution to our present and future energy needs. All I can do is Quote H.L. Mencken "For every problem, there is a solution that is clear, simple, and wrong" I may have botched the quote but it should be very close to what he said.


Dave


I reread the article, a little more thoroughly this time. I still agree with some of it, but some of it really does not add up. However, I still don't think ethanol is going to be a great thing. As mentioned, it is a rob Peter to pay Pual problem.

[Paul_H]

It takes around 8,000 gallons of water to produce a gallon of ethanol from corn and each gallon of it leaves eight gallons of toxic waste sludge.

I'd like to see comments like that backed up with more info.Does that mean that for every quart of booze on the shelf in the liquor store,that 2000 gals of water were used and 2 gals of toxic sludge were produced as well as the additional two pints of pith that passed through the imbiber?

I don't believe that corn is the way to go, but I hate BS no matter where it comes from.

[Dave Shepard]

This may include the water needed to irrigate the corn in the first place, but I don't know. I have a hard time believing that it takes that much just for the distillery process.


Dave

[Norm]

It's the same old exaggerated anti ethanol rhetoric I read all the time. Some half truths some outright lies and so on.

I live in the middle of so called corn country. I am seeing some more corn on corn acres but have not seen any of the highly erodible or hay ground or so on and so on moved to corn acres. I put some of this land back into hay this year, was corn last year. None of the water ways or CRP acres are being converted. None of the wildlife areas or buffer zones or terraces that farmers have installed, much at their own expense, are being converted.

Contrary to what you read, such as this, farmers do care for the land and the environment. We have to or we lose our way of life. Yet we get city boys telling us what's what. I for one am tired of it. Come to my place if you believe this bs, I'll show you what is really going on. Might even take you on a tour of one of these bad old ethanol plants and will show you how they are not the polluters portrayed in this article. 

I guess I'd be happier if gas was still .75 a gallon since corn is pretty much the same price it was back then. I wonder how many would be happy if their wages stayed the same as back then.

[Fla._Deadheader]

      GO NORM 

  NO one fuel will solve the problem. Common sense MIGHT come into play, but, I believe he died some years back 

[sawguy21]

Good post Norm. That kind of rhetoric is what gets greenpeace and the Hollywood celebrities in a knot. The other side needs to be told but guys like this won't listen, it does not suit their agenda.

[Paul_H]

I checked a couple websites and found that trees consume huge amounts of water too.

From this site-  Link

A mature oak tree can draw up to 50 or more gallons of water per day. Trees take up water through their root system. Some of the water evaporates from the leaves in a process called transpiration.

And then from this site Anudder Link

a 20-inch DBH oak tree with a merchantable height of 2-1/2 logs contains 260 board feet Doyle rule or 350 board feet International 1/4-Inch rule.

50 gals per day x 365 days x 200 years amounts to 3,650,000 gals consumed in the lifetime of a single tree. That's 14,038 gals per board foot or,74,869 gals per 8'  2x4.
That's a lot of water for a few boards and if we get rid of the trees were removed we could set up more windmills and solar panels. 

Trees suck,literally.

[Patty]

The article would be a better read if the guy had a clue as to what he was talking about. 

[Cedarman]

43,560 square feet per acre. 48 inches of rain per acre per year. 174240 cubic feet. At about 8 gallons of water per cubic foot, that is 1,393,920 gallons of water falling as rain per acre.  Divide that by 160 bushels of corn per acre and you get8712 gallons per bushel of corn.  Corn is about 56# per bushel.  Don't know how many gallons of ethonol,they get per bushel.

Regardless of the rhetoric of the editorial, ethanol from corn is not a good answer. Price increases over the next few years will do more to fuel our capitalism in creative endeavors than anything else.  If fuel prices stay cheap, there is simply no incentive to use anything else or conserve. 

We do not have the right to cheap fuel, food, medical care or cheap anything in this country. We have a group of citizens that have decided that providing these things gets them money to purchase other things that they desire.  Competition is what keeps the prices what they are.  We make conscious decisions each day as to what value we put on what we desire.  No matter how much or how little money we have, we always want way more than our wallets can accomodate.

I personally think ethanol is a flash in the pan. It may slow true progress in energy self sufficiency, but I don't think it will stop it.  Wind, solar and water will lead the way eventually as we use up our fossil fuels.

[Riles]

Whenever I see discussions about alternative energy, I think about the big rigs. It's one thing to power the family car on batteries or hydrogen, but they're non starters for an 80,000 pound truck.

If ethanol and biodiesel (not much difference from this guy's standpoint) aren't workable environmentally, and electricity isn't practical, the economy is on the brink of the next dark ages. Are we predicting the end of the world already?

[WDH]

I feel that the editorial presents an extremist view.  We are not going to convert all our arable acres to corn for fuel and not eat.  The CRP acres are not being re-converted to corn. 

While I do not believe ethanol is the answer, this editorial does not seem balanced to me.  Sometimes it seems that all you hear is one extreme talking (yelling) to the other extreme.  The folks in the middle never seem to get heard.

[wiam]

I blame ethanol for the higher prices I am paying for grain this year.

Will

[DanG]

UrbanLogger, has your friend ever been outside his little apartment?   Would he really recognize a stalk of corn if you whacked him beside the head with it?  His tantrum failed to offer any kind of viable alternative that hasn't already been accepted by the mainstream as limited resources.  Do you think he has any idea what it takes to manufacture a photo-voltaic cell, in terms of energy/resources consumed?  He sure didn't cover any of that in his editorial.  In terms of his use of the English language, I'd say he wrote a good article.  Otherwise, it pretty much stunk.

Wiam, why are you buying grain?  You runnin' a still or somethin'?

[Tom]

Just an observation:
When a gallon of 80 proof alcohol is $25 or $50 or more at the liquor store, how is the same alcohol going to decrease the cost of $3 a gallon gasoline?

It seems to me like the same kind of logic the politicians use when they spend 10 million dollars to get a $30,000 a year job. 

Something ain't right.    

(Yep, Dan,  It's been awhile since I priced that stuff.  After I wrote the post, I looked on the Internet and found that it was a lot more than I thought.  Since I saw nobody accessing that newly made post, I decided to update it.  somehow, I missed you.

[DanG]

Tom, what kind of rotgut are you drinkin' that only costs $20/gal?

A good portion of the price of liquor is in the form of punitive taxes.  Also, it is made to taste a certain way.(I started to say, "taste good", but that just wouldn't have worked. )  There are costs involved with aging, bottling, and making it semi-fit for human consumption, too.

edit:  When I started replying, the cost of that hooch was $15-20.  Now it is $25-50.   That's some pretty wild inflation ya got goin' there.

To answer the other part of the question;  the $25 alky will look pretty good when gas hits $35.  Save the $50 stuff for sipping.

[Cedarman]

300 acres of 20' tall trees in CRP land was bulldozed and corn is now growing on it in Orange Co In.  Can be seen from HWY 37 north of Paoli on west side of road.   

There will be more.  All you have to do is put a pencil to it and it says bulldoze.  Remember, government is subsidizing ethanol causing a distortion in the marketplace.  We are paying for this "cheaper" fuel through taxes.  It is actually more costly than fossil fuel.

[crtreedude]

I know that Ed Ring who owns EcoWorld.com is focusing a lot on the mixed blessing on bio-fuels. I have a lot of respect for what Ed allows on his site since at heart he is a CFO.  Having written articles for him in the past, I know he does not want half baked ideas - but well researched information.  It is worth checking him out for articles.

Most land owners have learned (those who are left) that if you abuse your land you can't just move to another piece of land now. Land owners are subjected to a pretty harsh "Survival of the Fittest" thinning process. I think Norm has it right.

But, the real damage being down by the bio-fuels is in clearing land in the tropics. Yes, that is exactly what they are doing. Because of what we are doing in reforestation we find ourselves smack in the middle of the environmental movement though I would have never thought of myself that way. I am more of a business man who chooses to give back to the land that sustains us all.

Anyway - around the environmental movement is more than enough scams. Well intentioned people get sucked into them because they are wanting to do something - but don't want to take the time to research. Then the government gets involved and usually makes it so there is no innovation that is possible.

I personally don't think the supply side is the answer - I think it is on demand. One of my few hobbies is riding bikes (the kind you pedal) - down here it is a joy because I don't get ridden off the road. Up there - many times it is risking life and limb. A large percentage of people could easily bike to work - like they do in most nations, even in the winter. They might be in a little better shape too.

We could also allow many more people to work at home instead of putting everyone in cubicle farms. I found that culture so weird in truth. I would be sitting next to a person and we would communicate via email because we didn't want to interrupt what we were doing. Why not both of us stay at home and work?

People want technology to fix the problem. Well technology has. We can communicate just fine over the Internet while I am in Costa Rica and you are where ever you happen to be.  If the government really wants to help, offer serious incentives to encourage companies to have employees work from home whenever they can. This saves on fuel and of course roads, bridges, etc. - and will save a ton on vehicles stuck in traffic jams.

The bio-fuel is still trying to produce more resources - just like most government thinking. How about looking at ways to seriously REDUCE our usage? Just like I would like the government to look at ways to serious reduce their spending instead of trying to figure out another way to tax me.

just my dos colones

[Quartlow]

lived within our means as communities and individuals,

Thats a statement I can agree with.

Norm.
Around here theres ground that hasn't been farmed in years being plowed up for corn production. Plenty of fields that had corn in them last year have corn in them again this year. The guys who are going to make the money around here this year are the ones that still have hay on.  My nieces husband is prime example. He sold mulch bales last week, crappy looking stuff. $35 a bale for 4X4 bales. The guy took all he had and said he would take every one he could make him all summer. 

[UrbanLogger]

The fella who wrote the editorial grew up on a farm in the upper midwest, I believe Wisconsin.

He lives in a self built and self sawn house on Signal Mtn near Chattanooga.

I believe the points he brings up are extremely valid. While not knowing for sure about his numbers, I'll assume that they are worst case scenario. I know for a fact that dry land corn farmers aren't expecting jack off their land this year in drought stricken Midsouth--if they can get it to seed they're talking 40-50 bushels per acre.

Increased corn ethanol production will drive up feed, meat and poultry prices. Planting corn on fields currently producing other grains will drive up staples and BEER.

He does hit on the solutions which no one in Big Business (read keepers of politicians) wants--independent wind and solar and NOT DRIVING SO MUCH.

It's time to start producing/manufacturing locally and stop shipping in our bread, butter and buttrests.

If y'all like, I'll invite Denny over here and y'all can have at him. You'll find that he has an excellent sense of humor and some wits about him.

Even my friends that have been successfully promoting agricultural alternatives--biofuels, bioplastics, agricultural fiber board, etc.--readily admit that we CANNOT replace petroleum in any sense in the quantities currently consumed in petroleum.

I am not a chicken little, I'm a get 'er done make doer.

Let me know if you want Denny to jump in over here.     

[DanG]

Scott, what struck my nerve about the article was the lack of "can do" spirit.  All I saw there was "can't do."

I'm not foolish enough to believe that we can totally replace petroleum with bio-fuels, but I do think it is a step in the right direction.  Solar, wind and Hydro are also valid sources of energy, but they can't do it, either.  All of them together can make a difference though, and coupled with conservation and efficiency, we can REDUCE the dependence on oil.  To think we can shake it altogether in the near future simply isn't realistic.  People just are not willing to step back into the Dark Ages, at least not in large numbers.

Of course Denny would be welcome to weigh in here.  I'd love to see his house and hear about how he built it.  He, like anybody else, would have to realize that this isn't a political board.  This is a place to discuss SOLUTIONS, and we aren't interested in "having at" anyone.  I would be interested in discussing his ideas on what we can do to make things better, and hearing what he thinks about mine.

[thurlow]

Interesting thread............I tend to be skeptical of anyone who takes an extreme position on any subject.  I do think that any of the solutions proposed are just short term..............in the grand scheme of things.  There are probably energy sources which haven't even been thought of yet, 'cept maybe in science fiction.  Remember reading 'somewhere', that around the turn of the last century.......not the recent one........... there was consideration of shutting down the U.S. patent office;  the thinking was that pretty much everything that could be invented had already been done. 

Extreme positions.........PETA;  ever hear of them throwing red paint on a matron wearing a fur coat?  Ever hear of them going into a biker bar and throwing red paint on a leather-wearing biker?  GOTTA HAVE THE COURAGE OF YOUR CONVICTIONS.   

[DanG]

Extreme positions.........PETA;  ever hear of them throwing red paint on a matron wearing a fur coat?  Ever hear of them going into a biker bar and throwing red paint on a leather-wearing biker?  GOTTA HAVE THE COURAGE OF YOUR CONVICTIONS.   

 

I guess them PETA folks ain't as stoopid as I always thought!

[Raider Bill]

Extreme positions.........PETA;  ever hear of them throwing red paint on a matron wearing a fur coat?  Ever hear of them going into a biker bar and throwing red paint on a leather-wearing biker?  GOTTA HAVE THE COURAGE OF YOUR CONVICTIONS.   

Let me offer few places to try this new found conviction. Actually I know of several "matrons" wearing leather that would sure turn this into a sporting event.

[Quartlow]

NOT DRIVING SO MUCH.

  In this country? 
Some folks do, but the majority don't. I try to make as few of trips to town as possible. I've seen times I haven't left the farm here for 10 days or so. If I am going I always ask cousin Ed if theres anything that needs picked up.

There are folks out there that can't tell you their neighbors first name, let alone get them to help each other out by picking things up for them.

[Captain]

I always like to read articles from both points of view...and make a more informed opinion on the matter myself.  Thanks for the post, Scott.  Working in the transportation industry is pretty tough these days.  I just hope we will be into hydrogen pretty soon, as ethanol and electricity (ie battery production and replacement over a vehilce's lifetime) both have significant environmental impacts.

Captain

[Larry]

Turning corn into fuel ain’t never gonna fly now that Tyson has figured out how to turn chicken parts into fuel.

I worry about planet earth being covered with chicken houses…and what are we going to do with all that chicken s…stuff?

[Gary_C]

This ethanol boom was started by farmers who were disgusted by continuing depression era prices for their corn. I have one of the earlier built ethanol plants within 15 miles from where I live. The small bank I use is in the same town and they helped arrange financing for the plant. I have heard all the arguments for and against ethanol. And I can tell you those farmers reasons for investing their money and committing some of their corn production to ethanol were to 1) stop sending their fuel dollars to countries that hate us, 2) get better prices than $1.00 per bushel for their corn, and 3) make some, but not much money on their risky investment. I for one, applaud their courage in starting this ethanol production with very worthy goals. ADM was then noticeably absent from the ethanol production and even now most of the ethanol plants around me are farmer owned coops.

I have never heard from any one involved in ethanol production that their goal was to totally replace fossil fuels with ethanol, as it has never been feasible to even attempt that worthy goal. Plus all of these ethanol operations are themselves working to reduce their feedstock costs now that corn prices have gone up so much and that includes cellulosic ethanol production. It just plain makes good business sense to find a lower cost input, no matter what you start with. Corn just happened to be the best, first feed stock.

Since I do actually live in Minnesota, I can tell you that we are not now, nor any time in the future going to be running out of water. Especially when I am presently sitting about 50 miles due south of Lake Superior which I am told contains 17 % of the worlds fresh water supply and I know it also is the source of most of the deep water aquifers that supply the upper Midwest with water.

There is much more that could be said about that editorial, but I have many better things to do right now. So I will just say, "based on the things I know not to be true, that editorial is just a bunch of what my heifers leave behind when they eat corn"!     

[OneWithWood]

The writer of that editorial may have some good points but the overt attitude expressed in his writing style makes it very hard to ferret those points out.  When people start out with such an attitude I tend to tune them out and stop reading.

The push behind corn based ethanol has very little to due with conservation, lessening oil dependence, or cleaner burning fuels.  Gary came very close to the reality.  It has everything to do with boosting the price farmers receive for corn.  This point was explained very clearly to a group of interested citizens at a state SWCD meeting by an Asst. Secretary of Ag.  Basically his message was this:  Corn prices go up past the subsidy trigger point, government expenditures for those subsidies go down, a miriad of budget problems and international trade issues go by the wayside.  Pretty simple short term fix.  Just what you expect to come out of Washington, D.C..  I was amazed with his candor.  The farm coops are banking heavily on the government subsidy for ethanol for a return on their investment.  So to some extent we are trading one subsidy for another but the volume is much different.

As long as the American public insists on driving wherever they want, whenever they want, one person to a car, we will have a dependency on foreign oil sources.  When the supplies get tight enough and the costs great enough we may change our ways.  It remains to be seen.

Scott, I would welcome Denny's input here.  Just warn him to check the attitude at the door.  A discussion of ideas is a good thing and we would all welcome it.  Championing a cause usually results in name calling aggressive behavior and does not add to the discussion.  I have the scars to prove it. 

[Patty]

I read an article today that refuted the often said "fact" that corn prices are raising the price of foods at the grocery store. The article claims that the high cost of energy has done far more to raise the price of foods far more than higher corn prices have.  His (the author) point was rising energy prices have twice the impact on the Consumer Price Index for food than does the price of corn. Energy is required to produce, process, package, and ship each food item, whereas corn prices impact only a small segment of the food market, since not all products rely on corn for production. Corn production will continue to increase to accommodate the increased demand. This increased supply will eventually reduce gasoline prices at the pump and thus eventually will reduce the cost of foods.

Interesting reading.

[DanG]

The cost to the consumer has nothing to do with my thoughts on alternative fuels.  Prices are going to go higher.  I'm just trying to find a way for us to continue to live comfortably when the oil goes away.  The bulk of the World's petroleum belongs to people who hate us, speaking strictly from the American point of view.  The political situation is just too doggone volatile for me to be comfortable relying on petroleum.

That being said, however, we are presented with the opportunity to correct some other travesties in our "system."  Do any of you remember when a farmer would pile his goods onto his truck and take it directly to the processor or consumer?  Well, the way I see it, we have a chance to go back to that.  With a new player in the game, the deck has to be re-shuffled.  If we can keep the current middlemen from grabbing up all the spoils, the farmer just might be able to get the price that his product is worth.  If they can get a fair price for their products, there will be no need for Government subsidies for fuel, feed, or food grade grains.  With this new market for korn(I'm using korn for and example because I know how to spell it) there is an opportunity for small grain elevators to spring up around the thousands of railroad sidings that are rusting away right now.  There could be an independent buyer at each of these locations, who could pay the farmer six or eight bucks a bushel for his korn, then load it straight onto a freight car for the trip to the refinery.  They would pay him about a quarter per bushel in profit, which would provide him with a fine living, then turn that bushel into a half-gallon of korn oil and 3 or 4 gallons of ethanol, which they would sell for 3 bucks a gallon.  Then they would ship the 32 pounds of residue off to the feedlots and chicken ranches, and make a tidy profit from it.  We would no longer have a need for Mr. Kennedy's Merchandise Mart, so we could render him into bio-diesel.  He would have more power than he could have hoped for.

[Fla._Deadheader]

 I realise DanG is using "for examples" in his postings, but, Corn is about the lowest producer of oil, of all the potential crops. Even Cotton is double the oil content of corn.

  IF I remember correctly, there is approx. 2.6 gallons of 98% alcohol recoverable from a bushel of corn. That's NOT proof, that's percent.

  I have to search for oil per bushel. Source I DO have says 18 gallons per acre 

  Soybeans are much higher and Canola and sunflower is even higher.

  I believe all the hype over corn to fuel, is not correct. Too many variables.

[Captain]

What we really need is sugar cane and lots of it....

[DanG]

You're right, Harold. (HEY! I just agreed with you! )  There isn't much oil in a bushel of corn, something like a pint or so, I believe.  Funny thing, though, corn oil is one of the cheapest oils on the grocery store shelf.  It probably has to do with demand.  That's some nasty stuff to cook with.  I read that they only get oil from the germ, that tiny little bud at the tip of the kernel.  I don't know how they seperate it.  Seems tedious.

[Fla._Deadheader]

      You agreed with me 

  Takes a LOT of water to seperate the germ from the kernel. Coarse grind the kernel, dissolve ?? the starch, and centrifuge the germ from the mush ??

  I HAD a URL to link to, but, the FF was down for over 2 hours or so

  I will find the link, later. It concerns OPEC.    The REST of the story. 

[Fla._Deadheader]

  Here's that link.  Link

[Raider Bill]

Sort of along these lines........

[Bioman]

Always a question of efficiency......