Go Back  HuntingNet.com Forums > Non Hunting > Politics
Do You Support Ethanol subsidies?? >

Do You Support Ethanol subsidies??

Politics Nothing goes with politics quite like crying and complaining, and we're a perfect example of that.

Do You Support Ethanol subsidies??

Old 08-29-2011, 12:40 PM
  #1  
Super Moderator
Thread Starter
 
CalHunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern California
Posts: 18,158
Default Do You Support Ethanol subsidies??

I came across this story and was thinking that I don't support ethanol subsidies and think it's an expensive waste of federal funding and local resources (especially excessive water consumption). What does everybody else think and, more importantly, why do you think so?


http://cowboybyte.com/516/iowa-farme...hanol-mandate/
CalHunter is offline  
Old 08-29-2011, 01:04 PM
  #2  
Typical Buck
 
Sfury's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 970
Default

Ethanol doesn't do enough good to offset the costs to produce it.

All the ethanol requirements have done is too raise corn prices, and gas costs, for no real net benefit.

That, and we can never produce enough corn to make it viable. Corn is the crop that depletes the resources in a field and has to be rotated out, or a ton of fertilizers have to be brought in, to keep a field going year after year. Just ask a farmer about it. They'll tell you the truth about crops.

I thought it was stupid when Wisconsin was one of the first to mandate its use in gasoline. I think it's just as stupid today, if not more so, now that what the farmers in my family predicted would happen has happened. They foresaw a corn shortage and increased prices as it was apparent the law would be passed.
Sfury is offline  
Old 08-29-2011, 01:15 PM
  #3  
sm
Spike
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location:
Posts: 37
Default

Originally Posted by Sfury View Post
Ethanol doesn't do enough good to offset the costs to produce it.

All the ethanol requirements have done is too raise corn prices, and gas costs, for no real net benefit.

That, and we can never produce enough corn to make it viable. Corn is the crop that depletes the resources in a field and has to be rotated out, or a ton of fertilizers have to be brought in, to keep a field going year after year. Just ask a farmer about it. They'll tell you the truth about crops.

I thought it was stupid when Wisconsin was one of the first to mandate its use in gasoline. I think it's just as stupid today, if not more so, now that what the farmers in my family predicted would happen has happened. They foresaw a corn shortage and increased prices as it was apparent the law would be passed.
Not only that, but the additional acreage put into production has caused runoff that has killed more fish than the Gulf oil spill, and the increased cost of corn has starved many people worldwide. How green is that?
sm is offline  
Old 08-29-2011, 01:18 PM
  #4  
Little Doe Peep
 
sachiko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Japan
Posts: 14,945
Smile

Subsidizing masks the true cost, not just the cost of production, but the effect of increasing corn prices on groceries.

The time when we could afford to subsidize projects because it seems like a nice thing to do has passed. We can no longer afford it. We, and particularly Congress needs to realize that.
sachiko is offline  
Old 08-29-2011, 01:32 PM
  #5  
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 264
Default

Originally Posted by sachiko View Post
Subsidizing masks the true cost, not just the cost of production, but the effect of increasing corn prices on groceries.

The time when we could afford to subsidize projects because it seems like a nice thing to do has passed. We can no longer afford it. We, and particularly Congress needs to realize that.
The problem is legislation, British Shell is investing heavy in Brazil to sell Ethanol to us. Go figure.??? When are we going to take markets back from conglomerates. My guess you will see ,in two years crude. $120. It should be $40. Why drill or invest when you can set back, make billions with no investment and blame OPEC. Nope he doesn't want to talk about it..
Venator2 is offline  
Old 08-29-2011, 03:41 PM
  #6  
Boone & Crockett
 
falcon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Comance county, OK
Posts: 11,381
Default

Ethanol is another welfare subsidy for the big time farmers and giant agri-businesses.

Brazilian ethanol is made from sugar cane. Brazil produces 560 gallons of ethanol from an acre of sugar cane. The US produces 420 gallons from an acre of corn.

http://www.extension.iastate.edu/agd.../HofJan09.html
falcon is offline  
Old 08-29-2011, 03:50 PM
  #7  
Giant Nontypical
 
salukipv1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: IL
Posts: 6,575
Default

Hell No!!!!

Go Bio-diesel.

Buy a diesel.


A recent documentary I watched stated that it takes 1 gallon of ethanol to produce 1 gallon of ethanol.

1 gallon of bio-diesel will produce 3 gallons of bio-diesel.

Last edited by salukipv1; 08-29-2011 at 04:00 PM.
salukipv1 is offline  
Old 08-29-2011, 03:52 PM
  #8  
Dominant Buck
 
burniegoeasily's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: land of the Lilliputians, In the state of insanity
Posts: 26,274
Default

No I do not support ethanol subsidies,,, heck, I dont support ethanol period. Cost too much to distil, hard on engines, low energy yield (lower than most hydrocarbons), and takes up valuble land for food crops.

Last edited by burniegoeasily; 08-29-2011 at 04:21 PM.
burniegoeasily is offline  
Old 08-29-2011, 04:41 PM
  #9  
Dominant Buck
 
Fieldmouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 37,721
Default

I saw my first pump that had it. I guess it was the first one I really noticed. I bought the real stuff anyway.

As for Brazil. We charge a hefty import tax on their stuff so as to make it unmarketable here in the US. So in reality, it's not about saving the planet.
Fieldmouse is offline  
Old 08-29-2011, 11:19 PM
  #10  
Giant Nontypical
 
Knightia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Wy
Posts: 8,871
Default

Nope as mentioned - its not cost effective & there are better choices to make fuel from. Without its subsides & market minipulations( nonfree market import/ large protectionist tariffs & ever increasing role in higher food costs etc - it would fall flat on its face on its own.

And yet even more may be mandated for future use by the EPA etc if it gets its way( should keep engine, carb etc repair ppl busy also?)

Saturday, January 8, 2011

GROUP SUES EPA OVER 15% ETHANOL MANDATE



(USAgNet /NebraskaAgConnection.com) -- USAgNet reports, "A festering dispute over allowing more ethanol in gasoline has landed in court." According to the story, a "coalition of auto, boat and outdoor power equipment manufacturers is asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to consider whether the EPA violated federal regulations" when in October the agency raised the maximum ethanol level in gasoline to 15% for 2007 model year and newer cars and light trucks.

http://www.nebraskaagconnection.com/story-national.php?Id=2541&yr=2010
Knightia is offline  

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.