When Detroit starts making something like this, I'll start thinking about converting
from my gas engine, heh.
peace,
Aielman
The official Prexus message board that won't sell out.
| Author | Comment | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
 Aielman KajiraLiege |
Jay Leno's Bio Diesel machine. |
Lead | ||
|
Posts: 4733 03-22-07 11:11 AM |
The problem with America is stupidity. I'm not saying there should be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself? Husband, Father, Squisher of bugs.
|
|||
|
|
||||
 Borofin |
#1 | |||
|
Posts: 3628 03-22-07 5:00 PM Community Member |
I'm not thrilled about these "bio" solutions. Food crops to fuel means less food and higher prices for food, like corn. The best crop for ethanol
is sugarcane but due to climate and possibly other reasons, sugarcane can't be produced efficiently in the states. So we are going with corn which
isn't nearly as good a source. LAst I checked corn is a major staple around the world and there the US has donated million and millions of metric tons of
it to starving peoples. If the corn lobby succeeds and more and more of the crop goes to fuel, then along with it will come commensurate higher corn prices
across the board which affects an enormous amount of things from animal feed to corn sweetener which is used in everything. Corn is an even bigger part of the
diet throughout latin-America where they are obviously much poorer and can't afford the corn price increases.
Oh, and sugarcane importation still has a hefty tarriff slapped on it from the lobbying efforts of agri-state politicians. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Gandol teh Pirate |
#2 | |||
|
Posts: 2538 03-22-07 6:24 PM Time-traveling
|
Who are you, and what have you done with Borofin?!
One interesting side effect of a corn-based economy corn can be grown all over the place and could potentially create wealth in countries that don't have oil or other economic prospects. They could become the new energy producers of the world. I really like the egalitarian prospect of that! The evils you [Borofin] mention are all boogey-men out of the 80s. Today's problems (Islamic radicalism, global climate change, immigration, etc.) have nothing to do with some sort of "grand design" by any of the monsters under your bed. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Khatrina Deathmaul |
#3 | |||
|
Posts: 93 03-23-07 12:48 AM Community Member |
The corn lobby? *boggle*
I know I know better than to read Bori's posts... sometimes they just sneak up on me, though. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
fatesdefiance |
#4 | |||
|
Posts: 3216 03-23-07 12:59 AM Community Member |
The corn lobby? *boggle*Any industry that big is going to lobby the government. Just see the National Corn Growers Association website... http://www.ncga.com/
Hunter Tarryn Valewalker -- Twisted Fates
(Prexus - Retired) Nightshade Tarryn Valewalker -- Kingfisher Brigade EQ2 - Unrest Tarryn of Dale, Hunter -- Dies Irae LotRO - Meneldor |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Kayso Gnomehater |
#5 | |||
|
Posts: 4868 03-23-07 1:51 AM BANNED |
I'm not thrilled about these "bio" solutions. Food crops to fuel means less food and higher prices for food, like corn. The best crop for
ethanol is sugarcane but due to climate and possibly other reasons, sugarcane can't be produced efficiently in the states. So we are going with corn which
isn't nearly as good a source. LAst I checked corn is a major staple around the world and there the US has donated million and millions of metric tons of
it to starving peoples. If the corn lobby succeeds and more and more of the crop goes to fuel, then along with it will come commensurate higher corn prices
across the board which affects an enormous amount of things from animal feed to corn sweetener which is used in everything. Corn is an even bigger part of the
diet throughout latin-America where they are obviously much poorer and can't afford the corn price increases.
Corn is what? Just over $3 a bushel? And that includes a significant increase even in the last year or two. It's been generally between $2 and $3 for the last 30 years. So, I wonder how much the cost of farming has increased in the last 30 years. Personally, I'd prefer to see the government reduce it's meddling in the agriculture market. Between artificial price floors/ceilings and subsidies, it's amazing the market even exists. One of the huge factors in obesity and diabetes is how much corn syrup we ingest. Corn gets more subsidy money than all the other crops combined last I read. So it keeps production artificially high which, in league with price fixing, keeps prices down. Hence the reason we have all this corn to donate -- we grow too much. In the last 20 years, the % of income spent on food has actually declined dramatically, but yet we're getting fatter. Any source you look to attributes this to the fact that healthy foods are more expensive than the unhealthy ones and the link to high fructose corn syrup is implicit. I do agree that the donations of corn to impoverished countries could likely drop which is unfortunate, but there could be an upside. We export 20% of our crop. If we stop the subsidies and stop being able to grow it so cheaply, it might create markets in impoverished nations that weren't economically viable before. They might grow more of their own corn (or whatever staple works best in that climate) and help their economy more than charitable donations from us. Maybe it's just the pro-Jihadist America-hating liberal in me, but I trust the free market. When the average % of income spent on food is less than 10%, I'd think even a 50% increase in that would be a small price to pay for the long term health cost savings and the reduction of our dependence on those lunatics in the Middle East. Oh, and sugarcane importation still has a hefty tarriff slapped on it from the lobbying efforts of agri-state politicians. I'm not sure lobbying effort is the right term, it seems more like pandering or pork in my mind, but I agree. But what do you expect from the red-state idiots of the corn belt? |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Ganders |
#6 | |||
|
Posts: 2430 03-23-07 4:32 AM |
I feel dirty, but... Borofin's right.
And it's not just price, it's the sheer volume required. I was reading a New Scientist article about this last year and the numbers simply don't work. For the US to produce 10% of it's fuel requirements from biofuels it wuld need something like 30% of it's agricultural land - and the US is one of the good countries; Europe needs something like 70%. The other problem is the crop you use; corn isn't that efficient, because it needs more processing. Sugar is easier to convert but is very demanding in terms of water. Cellulose ethanol is the best bet, but nobody's quite figured out how to do it commercially yet. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Ididar Tzan |
#7 | |||
|
Posts: 2649 03-23-07 6:40 AM |
Cellulose ethanol also has the benefit of emitting less carbon during its processing into fuel. Corn requires too much fertilizer and has other environmental
impacts which offsets a good deal of the benefit of reducing the carbon emissions. But, right now its more costly than converting corn. Give it a few years and
the costs may reach that of corn based ethanol.
Either way, ethanol is not the be-all and end-all of the fuel market problems. This has to be combined with more efficient cars like hybrids and electric vehicles. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Aielman KajiraLiege |
#8 | |||
|
Posts: 4733 03-23-07 6:42 AM |
So, I wonder how much the cost of farming has increased in the last 30 years. Hugely. Enough so that it's a large reason why we've lost so many small farms...they don't have the revenue stream to keep up. Harvesting equipment has become insanely expensive...and you need such equipment in order to keep up with the harvesting abilities of the larger farms. Any source you look to attributes this to the fact that healthy foods are more expensive than the unhealthy ones and the link to high fructose corn syrup is implicit. And that same study, if it has any relevence, will also cite the fact that we've all become far far more sedintary in both work and play, which contributes more than anything to our collective girth. The reason we grow too much corn has little to do with subsidies, and everything to do with improved farming and harvesting techniques that have greatly increased our yields. The subsidies don't keep price down...they keep it up. The reason behind subsidies is complicated. We do it on the one hand to protect farmers, but it's also done to protect the world grain market. If the US
were to unleash our full production capabilities on the rest of the world, we'd kill most of the rest of the world market...which would cause a helluva lot
of unrest. If we removed the artificial price floors, farmers (primarily the large combines) would have to start producing all that they could to make a
profit...and they'd dump it on the world market because the US doesn't need most of what they can produce. And they can't just change crops when
they litterally have tens of millions of dollars tied up in planting and harvesting equipment that is purpose built to the one crop.
The problem with America is stupidity. I'm not saying there should be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself? Husband, Father, Squisher of bugs.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
fatesdefiance |
#9 | |||
|
Posts: 3216 03-23-07 6:55 AM Community Member |
I don't think we're going to get a "silver bullet" for the energy problem until something like practical low temperature fusion becomes
available. Until then we need to diversify our energy supply (and for heaven's sake get the hell off the foreign black stuff.) Biodiesel isn't the
answer, but it would help, as would ethanol. Shifting a great deal of our electrical generation to nuclear power and clean coal would be a big help. Problem
is, the government is going to have little choice but push the energy companies into doing this, because all of these solutions are going to be more expensive.
As long as their bottom line says oil is best, they're going to drag their feet on anything else--no matter how much they may tout their research on
alternatives.
Frankly, I think our dependence on foreign oil is the single greatest national security dilemma facing this country. I'd even say terrorism pales in comparison.
Hunter Tarryn Valewalker -- Twisted Fates
(Prexus - Retired) Nightshade Tarryn Valewalker -- Kingfisher Brigade EQ2 - Unrest Tarryn of Dale, Hunter -- Dies Irae LotRO - Meneldor |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Ididar Tzan |
#10 | |||
|
Posts: 2649 03-23-07 7:09 AM |
Coal is best, per KWH ... but that's even dirtier than oil unless you use a carbon collection and storage system. But, those are relatively expensive and
drives the price of coal up to the same cost of using oil and the energy companies won't do it. Then again, when the price of electricity climbs because
the costs go up people will bitch and moan as well, so there's a two-prong problem with most pollution control measures.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
vizco |
#11 | |||
|
Posts: 3188 03-23-07 11:55 AM Raid Peon |
Corn prices in Latin America have been going up as a result of the use of more and more corn for ethanol production. Mexico has been particularly hard-hit,
because they import a lot of corn from the US.
 Harmony of Souls : My Quiver All this science I don't understand; it's just my job five days a week. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Physic FormerlyHasRez |
#12 | |||
|
Posts: 1430 03-23-07 12:59 PM |
>Corn prices in Latin America have been going up as a result of the use of more and more corn for ethanol production.
i've seen a report on this and it didn't make a whole lot of sense. ethanol is produced from yellow corn, mexico's food base is white corn |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Ididar Tzan |
#13 | |||
|
Posts: 2649 03-23-07 1:06 PM |
Yeah, but if they switch crops over to yellow corn from white ....
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
Physic FormerlyHasRez |
#14 | |||
|
Posts: 1430 03-23-07 1:36 PM |
>Yeah, but if they switch crops over to yellow corn from white ....
i think i saved the article which appeared in the print edition of the financial times about a month or so ago. the white corn used in mexican food is largely grown in mexico, us yellow corn had no impact on it one way or the other was the claim in the article. corn ethanol consumption has had other impacts in europe such as farmers switching from growing barley to growing corn which is impacting beer prices. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
vizco |
#15 | |||
|
Posts: 3188 03-23-07 2:48 PM Raid Peon |
The article I was remembering, from the Washington Post:
Mexico is in the grip of the worst tortilla crisis in its modern history. Dramatically rising international corn prices, spurred by demand for the grain-based fuel ethanol, have led to expensive tortillas. That, in turn, has led to lower sales for vendors such as Rosales and angry protests by consumers.There's not much factual backup for the conclusion, so I'm not quite as sure cause-effect relationship is as clear as the quotation makes it, but that's where I got it from. Googling around produces more articles with the same theme, but again, the cause-effect part is lacking. It is a fact that corn prices worldwide have risen, and prices in Mexico more than average, and Mexico imports corn from the US. So there may be some truth to the allegation. Harmony of Souls : My Quiver All this science I don't understand; it's just my job five days a week. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Kayso Gnomehater |
#16 | |||
|
Posts: 4868 03-23-07 3:01 PM BANNED |
Hugely. Enough so that it's a large reason why we've lost so many small farms...they don't have the revenue stream to keep up. Harvesting
equipment has become insanely expensive...and you need such equipment in order to keep up with the harvesting abilities of the larger farms.
That's what I've gathered too from what I've read. And that same study, if it has any relevence, will also cite the fact that we've all become far far more sedintary in both work and play, which contributes more than anything to our collective girth. I can tell you that while it's a factor, it's not the biggest by any stretch. Americans 100 years ago were certainly more active, but it's not like they were professional athletes. The average American consumes 10x the sugar that he consumed 100 years prior. Going back to the activity levels of 100 years ago alone wouldn't have near the impact that dietary changes would. Exercise is great for a number of reasons including burning excess calories, but you have to spend a hell of a lot of time on the treadmill to burn the 400+ calories of pure sugars the average American consumes per day -- more than an hour even at a brisk pace. That's a lot of exercise just to break even. The reason we grow too much corn has little to do with subsidies, and everything to do with improved farming and harvesting techniques that have greatly increased our yields. The subsidies don't keep price down...they keep it up. Not true. This is the first source that comes up when you google "corn subsidy": http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/1031/p17s01-lihc.html I'm not picking and choosing as I find the source repugnant. It's the first source. It also echoes everything I've read/seen. The price you and I pay is the market price with some price fixing. The subsidy is a flat fee paid to farmers per bushel produced and is independent of price. So, as long as you can grow corn for close to the subsidy price, you can produce as much corn as you want -- market be damned. Last I remember the subsidy price was ~$2 per bushel, but I could be wrong on that. The greater the supply beyond market demand, the cheaper corn is. Corn prices in Latin America have been going up as a result of the use of more and more corn for ethanol production. Mexico has been particularly hard-hit, because they import a lot of corn from the US. i've seen a report on this and it didn't make a whole lot of sense. ethanol is produced from yellow corn, mexico's food base is white corn Yeah, but if they switch crops over to yellow corn from white .... I'm not sure how it works, but there are several articles I've seen in the last couple of years saying that not only are Mexicans hit by the corn price, but their farmers are hit hard too because of our "agricultural dumping" practices. Their farmers aren't subsidized like ours, so they can't compete. I found some Oxfam papers with a quick google saying this, but they were a couple of years old. That's all the research I'm willing to do, as little as it was, but if anyone wants to dig up some more I would be interested to see it. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Zonn |
#17 | |||
|
Posts: 764 03-23-07 6:54 PM The Lizard King |
Bio-fuels aren't a magic bullet and none of the tech out there is. The solutions come in a broad set of changes creating niche markets appropriate to the
locality. Bio-fuels are part of the broader solution and I think bio-diesel is particularly of interest as it has a higher energy yield with most any feedstock
when compared to corn ethanol. Beyond that diesel engines typically yield higher efficiency per gallon of fuel. Combine those two facts with a shipping
industry defendant upon diesel fuel and there's an abundant market for the fuel. Bio-fuels are certainly a part of the solution.
Transportation fuel/energy requires many contributers to shift us from oil dependency. There must be increases in efficiency on both the consumption and generation side. We need to diversify the market with plug-in electric, hybrids and flex fuel vehicles filling niches where one technology has advantages over others. We also have to look at the impact of globalization and cross country shipping on energy use, there is certainly a point where energy/pollution costs make it reasonable to produce goods locally. We need to be much more diverse in how we generate, consume and conserve energy. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Borofin |
#18 | |||
|
Posts: 3628 03-23-07 9:30 PM Community Member |
Khatrina, I hope this thread was an education for you. Also, you may want to do a little of your own research. The Agricultural lobby gets a lot of hefty gifts
from the feds and has throughout the years no matter who was in control of congress or the Presidency. Corn growers are a very hefty chunk of it.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
Kayso Gnomehater |
#19 | |||
|
Posts: 4868 03-24-07 1:32 AM BANNED |
The best crop for ethanol is sugarcane but due to climate and possibly other reasons, sugarcane can't be produced efficiently in the
states.
Oh, and sugarcane importation still has a hefty tarriff slapped on it from the lobbying efforts of agri-state politicians. Is it really that we can't grow sugar cane in the US, or is it that it's not as profitable? I mean, if I could make more money growing corn we don't need due to government kickbacks, I would. I grew up not far from Sugar Land, Texas -- home of Imperial Sugar. If they can grow it there, I'm surprised they can't grow it all along the Gulf Coast in a geographic area ~ the size of the "Corn Belt". |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Ganders |
#20 | |||
|
Posts: 2430 03-24-07 4:06 AM |
I don't know what your water availability is like, but sugar cane is a very thirsty crop, which have some impact on whether you grow it.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
Khatrina Deathmaul |
#21 | |||
|
Posts: 93 03-24-07 10:21 AM Community Member |
Oh, yeah, I understand that, and I knew that, I don't know why it made me boggle so much... perhaps it was just the way it was put... The corn lobby. It still makes me giggle, a bit. Maybe it's a sign of my need to get more sleep...
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
Borofin |
#22 | |||
|
Posts: 3628 03-24-07 2:51 PM Community Member |
I found a plausible explanation of why sugarcane isn't much of a US crop now, and likely won't ever be again.
http://www.siu.edu/~ebl/leaflets/cane.htm "The sugarcane was one of the first "cash crops" of early colonial America. It grew plentifully in the southern states, and was a major source of income for many plantations. It is grown readily in the United States in Hawaii, Louisiana, Florida and Puerto Rico. The countries that produce the largest amounts of sugarcane are Brazil, Cuba, Kazakhstan, Mexico, India, and Australia (Microsoft, 1994). Sugarcane cannot be easily harvested by machine, so for centuries it has been harvested by hand, using large machete like blades. For this reason sugarcane fields have very large amounts of farm hands, and are a major source of employment throughout South America, Central America, and even the Caribbean. In early America, when the plant was readily harvested, it was a major source of slavery in the south. However, with the advent of abolition, it was found that sugarcane could be imported cheaper than it could be grown (Microsoft, 1994). This is why the sugarcane industry in the United States has diminished so sharply since the Civil War." So, besides being best grown in only a few states that already grow more profitable crops, sugarcane is extremely manual labor intensive. Corn crops in the US, especially the ultra huge farms, have it down to a science with near total mechanization and efficiency. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Borofin |
#23 | |||
|
Posts: 3628 03-24-07 2:57 PM Community Member |
Like it or not, it looks like the US is moving a lot of resources to corn-based ethanol production:
U.S. Corn Exports to Drop Dramatically Due to Ethanol Growth http://www.bioproductsalberta.com/news/dec/dec06_2.php "If only a quarter of proposed new Midwest ethanol plants come on-line, up to half of corn in Midwest states currently sent for export could be diverted to domestic ethanol production, according to a new report issued by the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP). Recent projections by the U.S. Department of Agriculture concur that a significant portion of corn for future ethanol plants will come from exports." And if you care to learn more about corn science and ever increasin yields: http://www.bioproductsalberta.com/news/dec/dec06_1.php |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Borofin |
#24 | |||
|
Posts: 3628 03-24-07 3:02 PM Community Member |
And finally one last post by me in this thread. This article rips to shreds the whole corn ethanol scheme that we appear to have already adopted in the US.
WHAT IS THE REAL COST OF CORN ETHANOL? |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Deceiverprexus |
#25 | |||
|
Posts: 320 03-25-07 12:35 AM Community Member |
I'm not thrilled about these "bio" solutions. Food crops to fuel means less food and higher prices for food, like corn. The best crop for ethanol is sugarcane but due to climate and possibly other reasons, sugarcane can't be produced efficiently in the states. So we are going with corn which isn't nearly as good a source. LAst I checked corn is a major staple around the world and there the US has donated million and millions of metric tons of it to starving peoples. If the corn lobby succeeds and more and more of the crop goes to fuel, then along with it will come commensurate higher corn prices across the board which affects an enormous amount of things from animal feed to corn sweetener which is used in everything. Corn is an even bigger part of the diet throughout latin-America where they are obviously much poorer and can't afford the corn price increases.Wow, I agree with you compleatly. I think ethanol costs way more than it's worth as an "alternative" fuel. Corn costs a TON of engery to grow and doesn't really give that much back, not to mention that tying energy costs with food costs create all sor | |||
