No post body was provided.
U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline
231–240 of 248 posts
Re: U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline
#232Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree. I can't speak to how this was marketed/pitched at a national level, but in my (midwestern) state it was a huge deal so even as a kid I paid attention to it. I don't remember much of a climate pitch at all. Everyone immediately pointed out that it cost more energy than it produced. The pitch to the public where I lived at the time was national security (energy independence), and of course the demand it would…
> it cost more energy than it produced How can that be? Are you including the solar energy? Well, in that case, every process out there has a less than 100% efficiency, so the claim may be true, but also vacuous. If you don't include the solar energy, then are you saying that all the energy used to make the fertilizers, to plow the fields, then harvest them, then brew the corn and distill it, is less than the energy…
Fair enough. Back then I recall that generally being the argument being pushed by the opposition, and never really investigated in the years since.
I am definitely surprised it's a positive number when combined with modern carbon-intensive agriculture practices. Learn something new every day!
Either way the sentiment at the time was very much "rah rah america" vs. "save the planet", but that could certainly be my quite fallible memory.
Re: U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline
#233Earlier quoted context omitted.
Subcidies are 90% of the reason our country is turning to shit. It leads to corruption, massive distortions and zombie companies that only exist as parasites on tax payers. From the ballooning student debt, to the ridiculous military industry, to prisons being at record numbers, etc. We need a lean and efficient economy which functions "as is", a true and fair free market. Politics should have close to no impact on i…
Subsidies are the symptom. The reason is fed govt ability to create unlimited spending. The reason for that is 3rd central bank known as 'Federal Reserve' which manipulates interest rate on govt debt issuance.
Honest question - did farm subsidies precede the FR?
Re: U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline
#234Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does ethanol clean the air around large cities? It's still a hydrocarbon fuel and still requires a catalytic converter to lower the production of harmful byproducts from burning it inside of a cars cylinder.
It's a substitute for lead in gasoline. There might be other reasons too.
You can have high octane gasoline without lead. Suggesting that ethanol replaced lead is facetious.
It's also an absurd notion. Leaded gasoline to this still poisons the air of all 50 states in the form of 100LL avgas. Suggesting that a wasteful farming practice is saving us from lead is like shooting one foot off and the exclaiming that you "saved" your other foot.
Re: U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline
#235Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure but most people don't understand how truly awful the caucus system is so it's worth repeating from time to time.
Might want to mention why it's awful then. It's much easier to manipulate for one.
I was on a phone. It's easy enough to check wikipedia and follow sources from there.
Re: U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline
#236Corn in the US is mostly used for harmful purposes. It's used for producing fodder for intensive cattle farming (which of course produces lots of CO2). It's used for biofuel production, which as the article observes releases more CO2 than that it saves. And it's used for producing corn syrup which is an ingredient that nobody needs in their diet. The rest, which would be usage for e.g. corn bread or other staples of…
It’s a hedge for a nuclear war. If this US is in total isolation, they can grow corn, wheat, soybeans etc quickly with high output.
Thinking about the geopolitical strategic layer of ag policy is fascinating!
Re: U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline
#237Earlier quoted context omitted.
Industries and business absolutely have to be allowed to die if they are no longer necessary and desired by the market. If not, you're just kicking the can down the road. Give them a UBI if you are so concerned. Don't prop up zombie industries.
>Industries and business absolutely have to be allowed to die if they are no longer necessary and desired by the market. The defense industry would like to have a word with you. There are certain industries that the government props up solely to maintain the capability in times of crisis. I would argue that ensuring an adequate capacity to generate a self sufficient food supply is important enough to meet that bar.
Defence is necessary so it isn't a refutation of what I was saying.
Also, there is no way the US subsidies of food and billion pounds of cheese in cold storage etc etc have anything to do with a defence justification, it is pure corruption and zombie subsidies top to bottom.
Re: U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline
#238Earlier quoted context omitted.
We just need a big state to try it: if California or Texas tries it that rule will get repealed very quickly.
I don't see why California or Texas trying it would change anything.
Either party cannot afford to voluntarily give up so many electoral votes. If I understand it correctly, the # of electoral votes these states have give them enormous sway within the parties.
Re: U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline
#239Earlier quoted context omitted.
Subsidies are the symptom. The reason is fed govt ability to create unlimited spending. The reason for that is 3rd central bank known as 'Federal Reserve' which manipulates interest rate on govt debt issuance.
Honest question - did farm subsidies precede the FR?
Subsidies in general are enabled by deficit money printing which would presently be unaffordable without interest rate suppression.
Farm subsidies take various forms such as tax preferences, import tariffs, and a USDA organization specifically tasked with manipulating crop prices. https://www.usda.gov/ccc
Re: U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline
#240Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see why California or Texas trying it would change anything.
Either party cannot afford to voluntarily give up so many electoral votes. If I understand it correctly, the # of electoral votes these states have give them enormous sway within the parties.
That's not how it works. The parties have passed a rule that if California or Texas has one of the first primaries they get changed to 1 electoral vote (well, one delegate, which is the equivalent except there are 10x as many delegates as electors) to decide on the party's nominee. So they would lose what influence they have.
The influence of big states within the party because of electoral votes is pretty small. The state's electoral votes are applied by the citizens of the state. I mean, yeah if you could get 50+% of Texas's voters to credibly promise to vote for the presidential candidate of the party that had an earlier Texas primary they would compete hard for it. But in reality, they're going to vote for the republican nominee. Same logic for California but for the democratic nominee.