Al Gore's comments on Ethanol support

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by mcrain, Nov 29, 2010.

  1. mcrain macrumors 68000

    mcrain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Location:
    Illinois
    #1
    NYT

    WSJ

    My take: I've seen over the last decade or so a shift in ethanol support here in the midwest. It seems to be more about the money than reducing oil use or greenhouse emissions.
     
  2. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #2
    corn ethanol is crap. It is beyond crap. We only get 1.1 gallons of ethanol for ever gallon we spend to create it. It the return rate on it is beyond crap. There are by far better ways to fuel cars that have a better return rate in terms of renewable. Corn is far from renewable and it has been argue that Ethanol is a negative on fossil fuels once you add in fertilizer.

    Now is ethanol a good additive to fuel (up to 10%) yes it is. It helps with the vaporisation but after that we get negative returns on it.

    There are much better ways and corn is not the answer. All it will do is drive up cost and not reduce our demand on oil.
     
  3. fivepoint, Nov 29, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2010

    fivepoint macrumors 65816

    fivepoint

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    Location:
    IOWA
    #3
    Kill federal subsidies. Kill market manipulation.
    Allow the free market to prosper.

    Simple stuff, folks.



    On a side note: Mcrain is right, it is far more about the money than greenhouse gases, and that's a good thing. A focus on keeping energy dollars in the U.S. instead of sending them to Saudi Arabia is easily the biggest benefit of Ethanol. I think Ethanol has a lot of upwards potential. Corn is not the most efficient renewable resource for this purpose as it utilizes prime crop ground increasing the cost of other goods such as beef, soybeans, pork, etc... there are varieties of grasses, etc. which are proving to be more efficient in the long run as they can be grown in areas which are no good for anything other than growing grass. Also, algae digesters are showing promise as well, not to mention corn cob/stubble materials which are limited in use otherwise. These types of research efforts should be done at the state and corporation level where people are held to account - not at the federal level.
     
  4. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #4
    Well that would require taxes on airline fuel for example.
     
  5. sysiphus, Nov 29, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2010

    sysiphus macrumors 6502a

    sysiphus

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    #5
    I'm inclined to agree (in principle). Let's start with US sugar, though...

    (That said, there are some areas where government and "private" industry are inextricably tied...)
     
  6. Rt&Dzine macrumors 6502a

    Rt&Dzine

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2008
    #6
    Even nuclear power? The energy industry and transportation connected with it would be in deep trouble without subsidies of some kind.

    Not as simple as you think.
     
  7. fivepoint macrumors 65816

    fivepoint

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    Location:
    IOWA
    #7
    The reason there are subsidies for ethanol is because people said it couldn't compete with the highly subsidized oil industry. The reason there are subsidies for nuclear is because people said it couldn't compete with the highly subsidized coal industry. The same with wind.

    Subsidies aren't the solution to the problem... subsidies ARE the problem!
     
  8. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
  9. Rt&Dzine, Nov 29, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2010

    Rt&Dzine macrumors 6502a

    Rt&Dzine

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2008
    #9
    And people think they pay a lot for power now.

    What is your plan for all the pollution created by the oil and manufacturing industries?

    .
     
  10. bobr1952 macrumors 68020

    bobr1952

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2008
    Location:
    Melbourne, FL
    #10
    Great answer!--that is exactly how I feel about the whole ethanol waste of time and money.
     
  11. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #11
    You forgot the most important part, the Corn Lobby.
     
  12. CaoCao macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2010
    #12
    Okay, lets stop subsidizing corn
    His answer is probably "Global Warming is a lie"
     
  13. Rt&Dzine macrumors 6502a

    Rt&Dzine

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2008
    #13
    Well sure, the Cato Institute told him that. But it's much more than global warming that's involved. The founders of the Cato Institute are one of the largest polluters in the U.S., including oil spills, air pollution, formaldehyde, etc.—all the sickness, polluted lungs, cancers, and deaths. Who's going to pay for that?
     
  14. MyDesktopBroke macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2007
    #14
    No one can logically argue that the world isn't getting warmer. It's human impact that is contested by a small section of the scientific community.
     
  15. Sedulous macrumors 68000

    Sedulous

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2002
    #15
    Fission is an ok interim solution. Cornahol is a poor solution. Fusion is the future.
     
  16. mcrain thread starter macrumors 68000

    mcrain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Location:
    Illinois
    #16
    A perfect example of how big business controls national policy for their own profit instead of government acting for the benefit of the people and country as a whole.
     
  17. freeny macrumors 68020

    freeny

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2005
    Location:
    Location: Location:
    #17
    Big fan of capitalism, but it does have it's flaws...
     
  18. fivepoint macrumors 65816

    fivepoint

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    Location:
    IOWA
    #18
    Once again you're focusing on the symptoms and not the problem. Big corporations LOVE big government. Big corporations love big government because it allows them to lobby for legislation which benefits them and shuts out the competition. Lobbying only exists because government has put out the sign that says 'Free money! Lobbyists welcome! Help us manipulate the markets!"

    If we had a small limited government which only did it's constitutional duty and didn't try to manipulate markets and get involved in every aspect of our lives... there wouldn't be money to give, there wouldn't be lobbyists, there wouldn't be subsidies.
     
  19. mcrain thread starter macrumors 68000

    mcrain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Location:
    Illinois
    #19
    There also wouldn't be any restrictions on big business manipulating markets, selling unsafe products, and finding a way to profit off every aspect of our lives.
     
  20. fivepoint macrumors 65816

    fivepoint

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    Location:
    IOWA
    #20
    In a free market, "profiting off of every aspect of our lives" is a good thing. It means the company is producing goods and services which free consumers deem valuable to their lives and willingly purchase. The liberal fear of profit and/or 'windfall profits' is fascinating to me. Profit equals success for companies and consumers, it equals more and more mutually beneficial agreements being made.

    Companies looking to get 'windfall profits' will do whatever they can to avoid selling unsafe products which have no long-term benefit.

    As far as manipulating the market, we have laws against fraud and against monopolies. As long as those laws are being enforced, there's nothing to worry about. The benefits far outweigh any potential negatives.
     
  21. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #21
    I agree. Renewable energy sources are better than harvesting fossil fuels for a variety of reasons. But they need to come up with a more efficient crop than corn, corn which is used for food.
     
  22. jayducharme macrumors 68030

    jayducharme

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Location:
    The thick of it
    #22
    It's always about money. I've been following the wind power industry in the U.S., and it's somewhat depressing. They seem to be stuck in the same old technology because that's what's most cost-effective. What's lacking right now in this country (IMO) is the will do do good for the country as a whole, not just for industry or special interests.

    There are so many possibilities in this country to create new industries that not only benefit business, but benefit the earth. A UMass professor just came up with a way to turn discarded bio products into petroleum fuel. I think more inventions like that could help turn around our economic slump and at the same time bring benefits to society.
     
  23. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #23

    shall we go back to the robber barren days. In that free market they killed the competion with the huge somes of money and make monoplies.
    Or you can go back for example to standard Oil before they were broken up. They drove up prices and make sure no one else could come into the market.....

    You can have laws against them but you still have to keep things carefully. Wind fall profit should raise some red flags.

    Many companies are setting record profits yet they were doing massive lay offs at the same time.

    We need massive reform in this country.
     
  24. mcrain thread starter macrumors 68000

    mcrain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Location:
    Illinois
    #24
    NOT WHEN IT KILLS PEOPLE. Health insurance profits when it denys coverage.

    All insurance companies profit from denying people what they paid for. There is an incentive to hurt people or cheat them out of money.

    You're about to make a big "all liberals think something stupid" argument, and as usual, you are completely full of hot air. I'm a liberal, and I support making profits, but not at the expense of people's lives, and not when regulation can make that profiting safer, cleaner or better for the country.

    If all liberals fear profits, then you would allow the raping and pillaging a village so you could have more slaves to run your sweatshops and unsafe mines, all in the name of the almighty dollar. Both arguments are stupid, and if you want anyone to take you seriously, maybe you should rethink yours.

    Really, that's why the EPA, FCC, FDA, and a myriad of other federal agencies were necessary in the first place. In law school they have course after course stuffed with business law cases to read in which profit = doing anything including selling unsafe products.

    The fact that you think otherwise shows how incredibly naive you are.

    In your little mini-government that only did constitutional things, those laws against fraud and against monopolies wouldn't be/couldn't be enforced. You can't have your cake and eat it too, not unless you're a socialist marxist pig like us librools.
     
  25. fivepoint macrumors 65816

    fivepoint

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    Location:
    IOWA
    #25
    Such a fascinating perspective... is it your contention that companies should not be allowed to fire employees when they are having very profitable years? So, a car manufacturer for example shouldn't be allowed to fire line assembly workers in a profitable year even though doing to would mean the people would be replaced by efficient machines which could do the same job for 1/10th the cost in the next 10 years? You'd sacrifice the long term viability of the company and the long term viability of all the jobs and wealth the company creates just for the sake of shot term stability?

    Seems incredibly short-sighted, slightly ridiculous, and frankly... really bad business sense. If business owners thought like this, this country and everyone in it would be much worse off then they are today. Imagine if Apple hadn't been allowed to fire workers assembling the Newton or the Apple Hi-Fi because the company was clearly very profitable. No advancements, no opportunity for growth, your job now Apple is to keep people employed at whatever cost necessary. Good luck.




    Oh boy, ultra hyperbole. Masterful, mcrain. Masterful. How long I ask would a given insurance company stay in business if they never fulfilled their contracts and 'killed people'? Would that make the news? Would consumer agencies get wind of it and shout it to high-heaven? Would they lose court battles and get sewed for millions/billions of dollars in damages? Seriously, how long do you think a company like this would last? You like to use scare tactics to push towards a liberal utopia which frankly doesn't exist. You can't come to grips that the system doesn't need you, it doesn't need a group of elitist lever pullers in Washington controlling each and every aspect of our lives. You don't understand that Americans don't need the government to hold their hands and protect them from their own stupid mistakes.
     

Share This Page