They're starting to get it. The media are figuring out government meddling in U.S. energy policy is taking a toll on the American economy.
On February 20, the Labor Department reported that the Consumer Price Index (CPI), a key inflation reading, rose 0.4 percent in January, matching December's rise. Why? Increased food costs because corn is being used for ethanol.
"Farmers are replacing wheat fields with corn to meet the demand for alternative fuel, but that means higher flour prices - and in one Pennsylvania pizza shop, more expensive pies," NBC News correspondent Chris Jansing said on the February 27 "NBC Nightly News."
But the strongest correlation between the politics of alternative energy and the rise in inflation came from CNBC's Jim Cramer in a February 27 interview with Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) on his show "Mad Money."
"Senator, you mentioned inflation," an animated Cramer said. "Half of inflation is coming from oil. The other half is coming from food. Do you believe that we should continue to burn food in this country? Poor people cannot afford what we're doing with our ethanol strategy. We're raising the price of the staples that they eat. If we scrapped ethanol, half of our inflation would go away. Why are we allowing the ethanol lobby to destroy the affordability of people who want to eat chicken and beef?"
Clinton, a self-proclaimed opponent of Washington special interests, provided more of a dodge than an explanation.
"Well, I think it's a little more complicated, Jim, because I think the increases in the energy prices generally have contributed to food inflation," Clinton said. "Although, you're absolutely right - that the rising cost of corn and soybeans, which are ubiquitous in our food supply, have certainly contributed significantly, but we're in a transition period."
Rather than propose emission-free nuclear energy, cleaner uses of coal (abundant in supply in the U.S.) or even drilling in uninhabited isolated so-called wilderness areas in Alaska - Clinton gave Cramer empty talk about "green collar" jobs and the use of the highly inefficient solar and wind power.
"We need an energy policy that does focus on homegrown energy, and that has to be a broad base set of energy alternatives," Clinton said. "You know, ethanol from corn is not the most efficient way of producing it, but it is what we are doing now as we move toward cellulosic, as we look at how we're going to incentivize wind and solar. You know, I think we should be looking more at new forms of energy for our cars."
Comments Policy
Now if our elected
February 28, 2008 - 15:26 ET by motherbeltNow if our elected officials in DC would just get it too!
We recently had a story on our local radio station news about filling up the freezer, if you have one, with beef, because the price is going to be going up within a year.
Why? Because with the rising price of corn feed, beef raisers are thinning their herds.
Another example of the law of unintended consequences.
And the government's erroneous belief that they can make laws affecting the economy, and people won't change their behavior because of them.
Oh, but Senator Clinton says
Well, I think it's a little more complicated, Jim, because I think the increases in the energy prices generally have contributed to food inflation," Clinton said. "Although, you're absolutely right - that the rising cost of corn and soybeans, which are ubiquitous in our food supply, have certainly contributed significantly, but we're in a transition period."
It's because we're in a "transition period." Right. When she's President, this will all work out....we'll have cheap ethanol, cheap food, cheap oil, it will all be fine.
ETHANOL vs GROCERIES
February 28, 2008 - 17:49 ET by danybhoyIt's not just beef, the price of almost everything in the meat & dairy departments will go up. Beef, along with pork & poultry are fed corn feed, throw in products like milk, cheese, eggs, almost everything along those lines are gonna go up in price. These things come from those corn fed animals.
Not to mention that I have heard reports that we are now importing wheat, & other cash crops are being shoved aside because farmers want to get in on the ethanol gravy-train. So that will raise bread prices. Plus, ethanol is not as efficiant as good old gas in your car, is not easy to transport, is far more dangerous if there is an accidental fire, & will do nothing to help get America off of dictator/totalitarian/ owned oil. (I can't just trash middle-eastern oil, I gotta include nations like Venezuala, Nigeria, Russia, & Burma, you know, places you would like to live in if you could'nt live in America)
It's a classic case of liberalism & the law of unintended results, at least to those on the left.
"Some of us are wise, some of us are otherwise" Mark Levin
Not to mention that I have
February 28, 2008 - 19:08 ET by motherbeltNot to mention that I have heard reports that we are now importing
wheat, & other cash crops are being shoved aside because farmers
want to get in on the ethanol gravy-train.
What?! You mean farmers are growing the more profitable crop instead of making the sacrifice and growing wheat to keep bread prices down.
Why, those selfish SOB's!
Next government will step in and mandate who can grow what....to keep things, you know, in "balance."
MOTHERBELT...
February 29, 2008 - 02:52 ET by danybhoyHey, I'm all for the free market, I'm all about capitalism. But the only reason ethanol is profitable to farmers is because the gov't is subsidizing it to begin with. At the same time they are doing nothing to help out with domestic oil production, they are going out of their way to push ethanol. Biofuels might be something to look at, but NOT CORN.
"Some of us are wise, some of us are otherwise" Mark Levin
dany, that was my point.
February 29, 2008 - 08:04 ET by motherbeltdany, that was my point. The whole point of subsidizing is to get people to do it, right? Well they succeeded and now have a self-created problem on their hands. That's why I said they would want to step in now with more tinkering to 'fix" the problem they created.
Talk about wearing blinders, take a look at this from the Times Online: Food Shortages Loom
The amazing thing is they claim that ethanol has nothing to do with it....(emphasis added)
Though shortages are often blamed on the use of land for biofuel crops, the
main biofuel cereal crop is maize, not wheat.
They don't see the connection that land growing corn isn't growing wheat!
Using Ethanol is not a Good Idea
February 28, 2008 - 21:01 ET by PopularTech"There is no sound public policy reason for mandating the use of ethanol.” - Hillary Clinton, 2002
Myth: Corn Ethanol is Great (Video) (5min) (John Stossel, 20/20)
Ethanol is a bad fuel, you get less MPG when compared to gas:
Ethanol - Fuel Comparison Chart (Community Fuels)
Diesel = 130,000 BTUs, Gasoline = 125,000 BTUs, Ethanol (E85) = 80,000 BTUs
It also costs more once you adjust for the BTU rating even with the subsidies:
Ethanol - Fuel Gauge Report: E85 BTU Adjusted Price (AAA)
Subsidies - Biofuels: At What Cost? (Global Subsidies Initiative)
- Total Subsidies for Ethanol Between $6.3 and $8.7 Billion Per Year ($1.06-$1.45 Per Gallon)
- Total Subsidies for Biodiesel Between $1.7 and $2.3 Billion Per Year ($1.14-$1.55 Per Gallon)
Subsidies - Ethanol Keeps ADM Drunk On Tax Dollars (Cato Institute)
Subsidies - Ethanol Subsidies: New Ways to Waste Money (CNSNews)
Subsidies - OECD Warns Against Biofuels Subsidies (Financial Times, UK)
Subsidies - Push Ethanol Off the Dole (Cato Institute)
Subsidies - The Ethanol Subsidy is Worse Than You Can Imagine (Slate Magazine)
Now it is hitting the food supply:
Food - Biofuel Demand Makes Food Expensive (BBC)
Food - Biofuels Could Lead to Mass Hunger Deaths: U.N. Envoy (Reuters)
Food - Ethanol Fuel From Corn Faulted As "Unsustainable Subsidized Food Burning" In Analysis By Cornell Scientist (Science Daily)
Food - Ethanol fuels food price frenzy (Financial Post, Canda)
Food - Ethanol Mandates Could Drive Up Food Prices, Enviros Say (CNSNews)
Food - Ethanol Production, Worldwide Demand Sends Prices for Dairy Goods Soaring (MSNBC)
Food - IMF Warns About Impact of Biofuels on Food Prices (Forbes)
Food - How Biofuels Could Starve the Poor (The New York Times)
Food - More Ethanol, Less Sugar (The New York Times)
Food - Think Tank Warns Biofuel Will Lead to Rocketing Food Prices (Vnunet, UK)
Food - Will Demand for Ethanol Raise Food Prices? The Government Says Yes (FOXNews)
Livestock - Cattle Fed Byproducts Of Ethanol Production Harbor Dangerous E. Coli Bacteria (Science Daily)
Livestock - Ethanol, Corn To Weigh Heavily On Future Of Livestock Industry (Science Daily)
This is what happens when you let the government try to decide what is best for us and not the free market.
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
Baldersash!! Utter
February 28, 2008 - 21:02 ET by NL207Baldersash!! Utter nonsense! I consume ethanol regularly! It's great in moderation!
Baldersash?
February 28, 2008 - 21:09 ET by BlondeSorry...couldn't help that.
Balderdash!
Great word, and a lovely sentiment, too.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Perhaps drinking ethanol
February 28, 2008 - 21:21 ET by NL207Perhaps drinking ethanol does not equate with burning ethanol.
Quite
February 28, 2008 - 21:33 ET by BlondeDon't drink while burning ethanol.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
What about nuclear? why is
February 28, 2008 - 15:05 ET by MrSnugglesWhat about nuclear? why is it that the left insists on pushing the feel good "alternatives" and not the ones that actually work?
Oh, no, Mr. Snuggles,
February 28, 2008 - 15:07 ET by motherbeltOh, no, Mr. Snuggles, nuclear power is "scary". We all saw "China Syndrome"!
I just can't believe....
February 28, 2008 - 17:40 ET by NofThat the China Syndrome didn't win all the awards that year. It was such an eye opener......
About how Hollowwood dosen't know its ass from a hole in the ground.
Oh my god the reactor is critical!!!...really? So i guess all is well. Criticallity= reactor at steady state power operations.
"When you can't make them see the light, make them feel the heat" R. Reagan
Why would you think we would want switch to nuclear
February 28, 2008 - 19:25 ET by 10ksnookerChina is handling the nuclear part, they just broke ground with six of the latest Westinghouse generating reactors. Meanwhile we burn our food. As it gets colder and crop failures begin happening, it's going to turn out to be a really bad idea. Like most things Democrat, chalk up another dismal failure.
Unfortunately McCain is as big a global warming nutcase as is the Democrats.
In the end, the sun will win ...
Nuclear is a Solution
February 28, 2008 - 21:23 ET by PopularTechIf you want zero emmissions then Nuclear is the only choice. If you don't care about CO2 Natural Gas is the most cost effective, otherwise coal is the cheapest.
- The levelized cost of a kilowatt hour is 3.53 cents for coal, 5.47 cents for gas, 5.94 cents for nuclear
- 104 commercial Nuclear Reactors are operating in the United States (EIA)
- No new commercial Nuclear Reactor has come on line in the United States since 1996 (EIA)
- France Generates 80% of it's Electricity from Nuclear Power (BBC)
- China plans to build 30 more Nuclear Reactors by 2020 (USA Today)
- Russia to build 4 more Nuclear Reactors in India (RIA Novosti)
- There are plenty of Uranium resources to sustain the growth of Nuclear Power (NEA)
Bullshit! - Nukes, Hybrids & Lesbians (Video) (28min)
Chernobyl - Chernobyl life 'back to normal' within a decade (Environmental Data Interactive, UK)
Chernobyl - Chernobyl Incident Had Fewer Long-Term Health Impacts Than Expected (Science Daily)
Chernobyl - Chernobyl toll may be less than feared (USA Today)
Chernobyl - Danger from radiation is exaggerated, say scientists (The Times, UK)
Chernobyl - No Detectable Health Risk Is Found Outside Chernobyl Vicinity (The New York Times)
Chernobyl - The Myths of Chernobyl (Australasian Radiation Protection Society)
Chernobyl - UN Report says 56 killed so far due to Chernobyl nuclear accident (CBC News)
Three Mile Island - No Apparent Increase In Cancer Deaths Among Three Mile Island Residents, Report University Of Pittsburgh Researchers (Science Daily)
Three Mile Island - No Significant Rise In Cancer Deaths In 3-Mile Island Residents Over 20 Years, According To Study (Science Daily)
Three Mile Island - Failure of Science or Spin? (Science Daily)
Nuclear - Could Nuclear Power Be The Answer To Fresh Water? (Science Daily)
Nuclear - Former 'No Nukes' Protester: Stop Worrying and Love Nuclear Power (Wired)
Nuclear - Greenpeace is wrong - we must consider nuclear power (Patrick Moore, B.Sc. Forest Biology, Ph.D. Ecology)
Nuclear - Hot for Nukes (CNSNews)
Nuclear - Is Atomic Radiation as Dangerous as We Thought? (Spiegel Online, Germany)
Nuclear - Nuclear Energy: Expansion Across the Map (Hawaii Reporter)
Nuclear - Nuclear power will save the world, UN scientists claim (Daily Mail, UK)
Nuclear - Safe, Secure And Inexpensive Power From Newest Genearations Of Nuclear Reactors (Science Daily)
Nuclear - Sustainable Nuclear Energy Moves A Step Closer (Science Daily)
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
Clinton said. "You know,
February 28, 2008 - 15:07 ET by dscottClinton said. "You know, ethanol from corn is not the most efficient way of producing it, but it is what we are doing now as we move toward cellulosic, as we look at how we're going to incentivize wind and solar. You know, I think we should be looking more at new forms of energy for our cars."
A wonderful example of Magical Thinking. The Dems have no intention of repealing the ethanol mandates which pushed up fuel prices and caused less miles per gallon but instead ASSERT that it will happen just as they intend!
Lord Sidious / Darth Vader 2008 Long Live the Empire! Come to the Dark Side, it is your Destiny.
I'll be right back. I"m
February 28, 2008 - 15:14 ET by motherbeltYou know, I think we should be looking more at new forms of energy for our cars." -HRC
'll be right back. I"m going to go and look for a spot on my car to install a sail and a solar panel.....
And now for our next magic
February 28, 2008 - 15:39 ET by dscottAnd now for our next magic trick, free health care for all! Tada!!!!
Lord Sidious / Darth Vader 2008 Long Live the Empire! Come to the Dark Side, it is your Destiny.
Don't forget
February 28, 2008 - 17:43 ET by NofCut a couple of holes in the floor of your car. Make Fred Flinstone proud! Power brakes and Take off turbo assist....
"When you can't make them see the light, make them feel the heat" R. Reagan
http://video.google.com/vide
February 28, 2008 - 17:53 ET by dscotthttp://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=369463415941480101 you mean like this one? Or this one? http://survivalacres.com/wordpress/?p=1124
Lord Sidious / Darth Vader 2008 Long Live the Empire! Come to the Dark Side, it is your Destiny.
Wow
February 29, 2008 - 00:01 ET by NofThose are two of the saddest videos ever. The first thing looked like it had a turning radius worse then the 93' F-250 extended cab I once owned. And the other getting pulled over and towed was just too funny. Smoke another blunt hippie crew....
"When you can't make them see the light, make them feel the heat" R. Reagan
This is even more insane when investigated further
February 28, 2008 - 15:11 ET by c5thenThe Agriculture Dept. pays some farmers a stipend provided that they DON'T grow wheat. Why? Because "back in the day" they wanted wheat prices to stay high and we were growing too much. So now those smart farmers are getting paid NOT to grow wheat and growing corn instead and selling it for ethanol. On top of all that, Ethanol pollutes more than gasoline does so it's worse for the atmosphere. And...if you add in the cost to grow the corn and take away the government subsidies for ethanol production, it costs significantly more than gasoline.
This is just bad news all the way around.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Alan Keyes '08.
c5, you obviously have not
February 28, 2008 - 17:03 ET by motherbeltc5, you obviously have not passed Liberal Logic 101....the most basic course...
It's the "good intentions" that count. That's the only grade that matters...
<sarc off>
There are so many leftist
February 28, 2008 - 15:19 ET by JohnCThere are so many leftist lawyers in government who don't know squat about economics it is scary. These clowns think they can pass a law and snap their fingers and everything will respond to their wishes. They have no idea how interrelated economics is. We are in for a ride to hell and back if that pinko Obama is elected. Jimmy Carter was bad and he was in business for goodness sakes. Obama knows as much about our economy as I know about transplanting a brain.
Let's see
February 28, 2008 - 15:40 ET by okiehawk44We are trying to wean ourselves off buying foreign controlled fuel because they are unstable or don't like us etc -- but we would rather bankrupt one or more sectors of the economy (never good for the middle class) than pump that fuel in American controlled areas such as off the coast of Florida or in Alaska? Good thinking there America -- Oh, by the way, our Governor Crist (R) is another RINO who wants to be McCain's running mate but is dead set against off-shore drilling and is all atwitter and aglow that he can heat his swimming pool with solar panels (some of us have been doing that for decades) -- all these candidates should know what we need to do -- but they don't folks!
the other uncle Sam
February 28, 2008 - 15:50 ET by mom_roxI look forward to when my local Sam's Club stops selling gasoline with 10% ethanol. (Well, I can always HOPE. Barack says so.)
A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.
- George Bernard Shaw, 1944
Corn for Ethanol = Water Shortage
February 28, 2008 - 16:02 ET by metroxit does get worse:
Ethanol's Water Shortage:
http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB119258870811261613.html
We really have to stop ethanol, it is bad bad bad all the way around, solves nothing and makes just about everything worse.
See my reply to c5then,
February 29, 2008 - 14:10 ET by motherbeltSee my reply to c5then, above....it's the "good intentions" that matter...
An Ethanol Water Shortage is a Serious Problem
February 28, 2008 - 21:51 ET by PopularTechGovernment Mandated Ethanol does nothing but cause more problems:
Water - Ethanol Production May Put Pinch on Water Resources (FOXNews)
Water - Ethanol Production Threatens Plains States With Water Scarcity (Environmental News Service)
Water - Ethanol's Water Shortage (The Wall Street Journal)
Water - Increase In Ethanol Production From Corn Could Significantly Harm Water Quality (Science Daily)
Water - Water Constraints Rain on Ethanol Zeal (USA Today)
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
Pop, to add, ethanol
February 29, 2008 - 01:13 ET by Conservative VoicePop, to add, ethanol doesn't burn as efficiently, is thereby harder on the engine, hence decreases the life of the vehical...more waste.
Ethanol makes all food prices go up, because it costs more to feed cows, chickens, etc. So our stables of life all cost more...energy, food, water, land....we won't drown from global warming, we will starve...not from lack of resources, but the mismanagement of them due to feel good policies from Washington.
The Problems with Ethanol
February 29, 2008 - 01:26 ET by PopularTechI have all those links too...
Ethanol And Biodiesel From Crops Not Worth The Energy (Science Daily)
Myth: Corn Ethanol is Great (Video) (5min) (John Stossel, 20/20)
The Problems With Ethanol (Video) (5min)
Brazil - The Myth of Brazil’s Ethanol Success (Energy Tribune)
Brazil - Brazil Ethanol Boom Belied by Diseased Lungs Among Cane Workers (Bloomberg)
Brazil - 'Slave' Labourers Freed in Brazil (BBC)
Brazil - There Is No Ethanol Revolution in Brazil (LewRockwell)
Ethanol - Ethanol E85 fuel loses cost-benefit test to diesel (USA Today)
Ethanol - Ethanol Fuels Fire Concerns (ABC News)
Ethanol - Ethanol Is Not the Answer (The New York Sun)
Ethanol - Ethanol Makes Gasoline Costlier, Dirtier (Cato Institute)
Ethanol - Ethanol: Myths and Realities (BusinessWeek)
"Ethanol can't travel in pipelines along with gasoline, because it picks up excess water and impurities. Also, ethanol contains less energy than gas. That means drivers have to make more frequent trips to the pump."
Ethanol - Ethanol Vehicles Pose Significant Risk To Health, New Study Finds (Science Daily)
Ethanol - Fuel Comparison Chart (Community Fuels)
Diesel = 130,000 BTUs, Gasoline = 125,000 BTUs, Ethanol (E85) = 80,000 BTUs
Ethanol - Fuel Gauge Report: E85 BTU Adjusted Price (AAA)
Ethanol - Fuel Ethanol Cannot Alleviate U.S. Dependence On Petroleum (Science Daily)
Ethanol - Study: Ethanol May Add to Global Warming (USA Today)
Ethanol - Study: Ethanol Production Consumes Six Units Of Energy To Produce Just One (Science Daily)
Ethanol - Study: Ethanol Won't Solve Energy Problems (USA Today)
"Ethanol is far from a cure-all for the nation's energy problems. It's not as environmentally friendly as some supporters claim and would supply only 12 percent of U.S. motoring fuel even if every acre of corn were used."
Ethanol - Test results: E85 vs. gasoline (Consumer Reports)
Ethanol - The Environmental Costs of Ethanol (National Center For Policy Abalysis)
Ethanol - The Many Myths of Ethanol (John Stossel, ABC News)
Ethanol - The Ethanol Fallacy (Popular Mechanics)
Ethanol - The Ethanol Myth (Consumer Reports)
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
PT, do you have anything on
February 29, 2008 - 14:51 ET by dscottPT, do you have anything on Methanol as a fuel? I'm curious as to why there is so little interest in this area. I also wonder why LP gas is not that common either?
Lord Sidious / Darth Vader 2008 Long Live the Empire! Come to the Dark Side, it is your Destiny.
Methanol is worse then Ethanol
March 1, 2008 - 04:06 ET by PopularTechMethanol is used in some racing circuits who switched to it for "safety reasons" in that it burns near invisible and in a crash will not obstruct other cars still running, though this ironically caused dangerous pit fires, regardless Indycar recently switched to pure Ethanol. I would choose Ethanol over Methanol any day as it is safer and gets better fuel economy. The problem for ethanol is that gasoline exists which is a more cost effective, higher energy content fuel.
- Methanol reduces fuel economy compared to gasoline or ethanol
- Methanol is a colorless liquid (this requires fuels to be dyed)
- Methanol has inadequate vapor pressure for cold-starting, particularly in low ambient temperatures (this requires an additive)
- Methanol burns with a flame that is nearly invisible in direct sunlight (this is a safety concern as fires could start and go unnoticed)
- Methanol provides less lubricity than hydrocarbon fuels (this increases wear on various engine fuel system components, requiring an additive lubricant)
- Methanol is extremely poisonous and prolonged exposure can cause blindness or death
Methanol Energy Content (U.S Department of Energy)
"Methanol (M85) = 66,000 BTUs, Ethanol (E85) = 80,000 BTUs, Gasoline = 125,000 BTUs (per gallon)"
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
Question on wind power.
February 28, 2008 - 16:59 ET by danboWhile flying east into Dallas I noticed all those windmills.
My question. Do they do much? That's an awfull lot of land locked into windmills. And I suspect it took a lot of money to build them. Are they cost effective?
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
You be the judge:
February 28, 2008 - 17:09 ET by dscottYou be the judge: http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN2749522920080228?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews&rpc=22&sp=true
Lord Sidious / Darth Vader 2008 Long Live the Empire! Come to the Dark Side, it is your Destiny.
I agree it is a problem for
February 28, 2008 - 17:23 ET by danboI agree it is a problem for reliability. But I was also thinking cost effectiveness. For the amount of land locked up. The amount of steel locked up. You could build and operate a whole lot of coal or oil power plants.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
Not only that, but for
February 28, 2008 - 23:44 ET by motherbeltNot only that, but for solar power, I read years ago that the entire state of Illinois would have to be covered with solar panels in order to supply the city of Chicago.
Yeah, that'll work!
The Truth About Wind Power
February 28, 2008 - 23:26 ET by PopularTechNo Wind Power is not cost effective and must be subsidized to compete with coal, natural gas and nuclear for electrical generation.
- Wind Power is intermittent (wind farms must rely on conventional power plants to back up their supply)
- Wind Power costs twice as much as electricity generated from fossil fuels (the levelized cost of a kilowatt hour is 3.53 cents for coal, 5.47 cents for gas, 5.94 cents for nuclear and 6.64 cents for wind unsubsidized)
- Wind Power is not economically feasible without subsidies (subsidized at 1.9 cents per kilowatt hour in the United States)
- Wind Power equals only about 0.28% of the United State's energy supply (40% Oil, 23% Coal, 23% Natural Gas, 8% Nuclear and 0.28% Wind)
- Wind Energy cannot be harnessed to meet the timing of electricity demands (avoiding blackouts requires production and demand on an electrical grid be equal every second, so operators need gas-fired "load-following" generators that can adjust instantly)
- Wind Energy cannot be stored (unless batteries are used)
- Wind Farms are often located in remote locations, far from cities where the electricity is needed (this increases trasmission costs)
- Wind Farms can effect weather patterns (the turbulence from large wind farms creates warmer, drier conditions at the surface)
- Wind Farms can be eyesores (community members often complain about the blinding strobe-light sensation that takes place on wind farms at dawn and dusk)
- Wind Farms can produce noise pollution
- Wind Farms can interfere with radar
- Wind Farms have a devastating effect on birds (an estimated 44,000 birds have been killed over the past two decades by wind turbines in the Altamont Pass, east of San Francisco)
- Wind Farms need 100 times more land area than conventional power plants (to produce 1,000 MW of power, a wind farm would require approximately 192,000 acres, or 300 square miles; a nuclear plant needs less than 1,700 acres, or 2.65 square miles (within its security perimeter fence); and a coal powered plant takes up about 1,950 acres, 3.05 square miles)
- Wind Turbines have to be shut off in high winds or temperatures (wind turbines shut off in over 50mph winds or 100 degree temperatures)
- Wind Turbines can be dangerous (turbines can collapse, catch fire and the blades can break off)
Living Next Door to a Wind Farm, Australia (Video) (10min)
Wind Farms - Not In My Back Yard (Video) (5min) (John Stossel, 20/20)
Wind - Catch the Wind, Change the Weather (The New York Times)
Wind - Energy Answer is Not 'Blowing in the Wind' (The Heartland Institute)
Wind - Greenpeace Opposes Wind Farm Plan (BBC)
Wind - Problems With Wind Power (National Center for Policy Analysis)
Wind - The True Cost of Electricity from Wind Power And Windmill "Availability" Factors (Glen R. Schleede, Minnesotans For Sustainability)
Wind - Wind Energy Will Not Reduce US Oil Dependence (Glen R. Schleede, Minnesotans For Sustainability)
Wind - Wind Farm Claims Are So Much Hot Air (The Daily Telegraph, UK)
Wind - Wind Farms May Not Lower Air Pollution, Study Suggests (The New York Times)
Wind - Wind Power: Red Not Green (National Center for Policy Analysis)
Birds - Altamont Pass Settlement Fails to Reduce Bird Kills (The Heartland Institute)
Birds - Eagles Killed By Wind Farm Blades (The Daily Telegraph, UK)
Birds - Enviro Group Sues Wind Farm to Stop Bird Deaths (The Heartland Institute)
Birds - Rare Bird Killed By Wide Turbine (BBC)
Birds - Sea Eagles Being Killed by Wind Turbines (The Daily Telegraph)
Birds - Turbine Expansion Said to Threaten Birds (FOXNews)
Birds - Wind Farm 'Hits Eagle Numbers' (BBC)
Birds - Wind Farm Threat to Bird Species (BBC)
Birds - Wind Turbines Hazardous to Birds, Bats (UPI)
Birds - Wind Turbines Taking Toll on Birds of Prey (USA Today)
Eyesore - Blow Back Over 'Eyesore' Wind Farms (ABC News)
Eyesore - Wind Farm? Not Off My Back Porch (ABC News)
Eyesore - Wind Farms Worst Eyesore in UK (BBC)
Noise - Flicker noise from turbines a worry for Montreathmont plans (Brechin Advertiser, UK)
Noise - Wind Farm Noise 'Harms Health' (Yorkshire Post, UK)
Noise - Wind Farms 'Make People Sick Who Live Up to A Mile Away' (The Daily Telegraph)
Noise - Wind turbines 'are ruining our quality of life' (The Daily Telegraph, UK)
Radar - Wind Farm Blow to Radar Systems (BBC)
Radar - Wind Farm Fears For Ships' Radar (BBC)
Radar - Wind Farms 'A Threat to National Security' (The Times, UK)
Radar - Wind Farms Disrupt Radar Images (BBC)
Radar - Wind Farms 'Grounded By Air Safety Fears' (The Times, UK)
Radar - Wind Farms Threat to MoD Radar (The Press Association)
Radar - Windmill Projects Stilled For Now (USA Today)
Unsafe - The Dangers of Wind Power (BusinessWeek)
Unsafe - 242-foot Wind Turbine Snaps in Half, Killing a Worker at Top, Oregon (The Oregonian)
Unsafe - Big Chunk of Turbine Blade Shears Off (West Morning News, UK)
Unsafe - Blazing Turbine Falls Into Field, UK (BBC)
Unsafe - Danger Claim As Turbine Blade Snaps Off, UK (Berwickshire News)
Unsafe - Danish Wind Turbine Explosion (Video 1)
Unsafe - Danish Wind Turbine Explosion (Video 2)
Unsafe - Fire Damages Wind Turbine Near Garner, Iowa (Globe Gazette)
Unsafe - Man Dies After 100ft Turbine Fall, UK (BBC)
Unsafe - Two Giant Vestas Wind Turbines Collapse, UK (off-grid)
Unsafe - Unexpected Shrapnel From A Wind Turbine, UK (Habitat21)
Unsafe - Wind Farm Fears As Blade Snaps, UK (The Times, UK)
Unsafe - Wind Farm Fire Caused Blackout, Australia (News Limited, Australia)
Unsafe - Wind Turbine Catches Fire: Mount Storm, West Virginia (West Virginia Firefighters)
Unsafe - Wind Turbine Falls Near Weatherford, Oklahoma (The Oklahoman)
Unsafe - Wind Turbine on Fire, California (Video)
Unsafe - Wind Turbine on Fire (Video)
Unsafe - Winds Too Much for Turbine: Breaks Blade, Canada (The Sault Star)
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
Wind Power
February 28, 2008 - 17:14 ET by zoro7957.............What's that entail? Sails on our automobiles?
See my reply above...I'm
February 29, 2008 - 14:10 ET by motherbeltSee my reply above...I'm installing a sail AND a solar panel on mine!
The 2007 Energy bill - - the Truth about Ethanol/Congress
February 28, 2008 - 18:32 ET by JayTeeCongress is Choking us on Energy
Excerpts from HERE
The Financial Times article reported on how section 526 of the energy bill prohibits the federal government from buying oil that was produced from Canadian tar sands, a reserve that holds about two-thirds the amount of recoverable oil as compared to reserves in Saudi Arabia.
Because it takes greenhouse gas-producing energy to extract oil from the tar sands, the article focused on the fact that the law could affect billions of dollars of trade in oil, particularly since the U.S. Department of Defense is the world’s largest single buyer of light refined petroleum.
The plain language of section 526 also would seem to ban the federal government from purchasing biofuels like ethanol, since their life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions are greater than that of conventional petroleum.
A couple of observations on energy from an Iowan
February 28, 2008 - 23:07 ET by nkviking75There are several windmills on my western horizon, and even on the windiest days several of them always seem to be still. I assume this must be due to malfunctions. As often as this happens, one has to wonder how reliable the technology is.
Here's an interesting article from Wednesday's Mason City, IA, Globe-Gazette, our local paper. If there's a fire at an ethanol plant, most of our fire departments lack the chemical foam to fight the fires. It's expensive stuff and has a short shelf life. It's a bit off topic, but one more illustration of not thinking through all the implications of ethanol.
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
No, it's not really
February 29, 2008 - 14:07 ET by motherbeltNo, it's not really off-topic. It's just another example of "the law of unintended consequences."
»→ Premeditated lunacy
February 29, 2008 - 10:06 ET by Cool ArrowThis ethanol nonsense was so obvious. We knew subsidies would drive the price of food up and simultaneously drive up taxes.
It's the DDT story all over. A bunch of idiots decide to save the world with absolutes. "Absolutely no DDT!" And millions die.
♣ a seal
Ethanol is not a zero sum game
February 29, 2008 - 14:56 ET by JGsezYou can take ethanol out of corn and still feed the distiller grain to livestock. It has about 99% or more of the original feed value. Any ethanol plant worth investing in knows this. As do the large feedlot operations. They haul their corn to the ethanol plant and bring back distiller grain.
OPEC is working to find the monopoly price. Unless you break OPEC, we can never win in the energy game. We can't do what Reagan did and just say "Drill baby Drill". The other alternative is to develop "really clean" coal.
One solution by <a href="http://instapundit.com/archives2/013576.php">Bob Zubrin</a> - listen to the podcast. We waste tons of ethanol, methanol, and methane every day.
Food today is much less of the average family budget (when adjusted for inflation) than it was during the last oil crisis. In fact the reason it is higher at all is because dining out is included in food costs and represents the largest part of the food budget increase.
The biggest cause of food price increase is due to the price of oil - both for transportation and because of all the plastic used. Corn flakes, even at the current price of corn, have about 25 cents worth of corn. That is about right for the amount of wheat in a loaf of bread also - I would be surprised if there was 50 cents worth of wheat per loaf.
If you accept that China and India are bidding up the world price of oil, you should not be surprised if they bid up the price of food also. Check the volume of grain shipments at the ports and I'll wager the export tonnage is way up. In fact, I would suggest that since oil has more than doubled, you can expect food costs to double also.
Not much acreage that grows wheat is viable for corn. The crop most likely to be reduced by corn is soybeans.
I think Mr. Zubrin has it about right. Almost every part of the country has sources of ethanol, methanol, and methane that can be used for fuel.
Update: Farmers get no subsidy for ethanol. The subsidy is to the refiners and I suspect their lobbyists got it added as a poison pill.
And my Firefox seems to be messing up the format – sorry about that. Here is the Zubrin podcast link:
http://instapundit.c...
Interesting, this is
February 29, 2008 - 14:57 ET by dscottInteresting, this is basically what Lame Cherry has been saying for months here at NB. So your take is the high cost of fuel in transport is the primary driver of the food price rise in addition to high demand overseas? So why are people claiming ethanol is doing it?
Lord Sidious / Darth Vader 2008 Long Live the Empire! Come to the Dark Side, it is your Destiny.
Why? Beats me... But I have some ideas
February 29, 2008 - 15:44 ET by JGsezAnyone reading this site must know that the MSM is either lazy or can’t use Google. But I have some other ideas.
colleges of the plains.
their monopoly. Keep in mind that ethanol, as visualized by Mr. Zubrin,
will most likely be local production without a monopoly. Florida can
use orange and grapefruit waste product. Lumber areas can use wood products. If you could take ethanol out of wood chips, you could still make particle board. Every landfill produces methane. Methanol is routinely burned off in the oil fields and at the refinery.
I like Zubrin’s approach because it minimizes the role of government and opens up free enterprise.
In 1968 my father sold corn for roughly the minimum wage per bushel. Prior to the current price run up, the local price was at about $2.50/bushel and I suspect the current local price is at or below the minimum wage. You have to reduce the Chicago Board of Trade (CBT) price by the cost of transportation. Again the price of oil is involved bcause of the transportation cost. Odds are the local price will be conciderably below the CBT price.
Biofuels on the Free Market - Some Questions
February 29, 2008 - 21:48 ET by PopularTech1. Can Biofuels compete with Oil based fuels (Diesel, Gasoline) on the free market unsubsidized?
2. Do Biofuels have lower BTU ratings then Oil based fuels (Diesel, Gasoline)?
3. Do Biofuels have any other disadvantages compared with Oil based fuels (Diesel, Gasoline)?
The reason we use Oil based fuels (Diesel, Gasoline) is because they are cost effective, high energy content fuels.
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
Biofuels being competetive
March 1, 2008 - 18:22 ET by JGsezperformance for gasoline. When Rudulf Diesel demonstrated his engine at the Exhibition Fair in Paris in 1898, it ran at 75% efficiency versus 12% for the steam engines of the time. It also ran on peanut oil.
I like Zubrin's idea because it is inexpensive. Computers weren't developed by large corporations. Diesel's engine was developed by one thinking man - not a corporation. Perhaps biofuels will never work. I just know that producing flex-fuel engines is likely the most inexpensive means of providing an alternative to OPEC. Besides, I would rather have rich US farmers paying income tax than rich Sheiks and dictators.
The Cost of Biofuels: Myths and Realities
March 1, 2008 - 22:40 ET by PopularTechYou are adding in many different points to what I am talking about.
1. Cost - No Biofuels are not cost competitive with oil based fuels (gasoline and diesel) without government subsidies. The pricing you are linking to reflects the SUBSIDIZED non BTU adjusted price, this is incredibly misleading to the consumer.
Subsidies - Biofuels: At What Cost? (Global Subsidies Initiative)
- Total Subsidies for Ethanol Between $6.3 and $8.7 Billion Per Year ($1.42-$1.87 Per Gallon)
- Total Subsidies for Biodiesel Between $1.7 and $2.3 Billion Per Year ($1.69-$2.15 Per Gallon)
Once you remove the subsidies the price goes above gasoline and diesel. But that is not the end of the pricing disparity. You also have to factor in the BTU cost, which is how far you can go on a gallon of fuel. AAA provides this for the subsidized price of E85:
Ethanol - E85 BTU Adjusted Price (AAA)
Gasoline (regular) = $3.17 per gallon
E85 = $3.40 per gallon BTU adjusted
That is roughly another 23 cents MORE per gallon, making the true difference in cost for the current price of E85 compared to gasoline:
E85 = $4.82-$5.27 per gallon non subsidized + BTU adjusted
2. Ethanol and Biodiesel have lower BTU ratings then Gasoline and Diesel respectively thus they get less MPG for the same amount of fuel which I talked about above and must be accounted for in the price.
Ethanol Energy Content (U.S Department of Energy)
Ethanol (E85) = 80,000 BTUs, Gasoline = 125,000 BTUs (per gallon)
Biodiesel = 120,000 BTUs, Diesel = 130,000 BTUs (per gallon)
3. Ethanol can't travel in pipelines along with gasoline, because it picks up excess water and impurities. As a result, ethanol needs to be transported by trucks, trains, or barges, which is more expensive and complicated than sending it down a pipeline. Saying we should build new pipelines does not make them built. Ethanol is also harder to put out in a fire. While Biodiesel has gel problems in cold temperatures.
Now to your other points:
- I have no problem with having a choice, I have a problem with government mandates and subsidies. If the market demanded flex-fuel vehicles then we would have them.
- Good ideas and what we are actually using are two different things. Please stop talking about cellulose ethanol and tell me where it is actually being used cost effectively without subsidies and at a competitive price to gasoline. As of now the overwhelming majority of ethanol production is negatively effecting the food supply.
- The price of Biofuels must be proportionately less to Gasoline and Diesel not only without subsidies but for their energy content (BTU). I see no proof of this happening. When this happens I will agree with you. They will never be viable until then.
- Higher Octane rating has nothing to do with the energy content which are two different things. Higher Octane rating allows as you said for high compression, higher performing engines not necessarily better mileage. Higher Octane is one of the positive things about Ethanol. Buying higher Octane fuel will do nothing for your fuel economy. Using the proper Octane rating has one purpose and that is to prevent knocking at your engine's compression ratio. Using a higher one then your engine needs will do nothing but waste money. Premium fuels come with additional additives that offer benefits people mistake being due to the higher Octane rating.
- I am well aware that we are using Gasoline because it is a cost effective high energy content fuel.
- My point is Biofuels can become cost advantagous on their own through market forces once Gasoline and Diesel prices reach a certain price point and we should let the market decide when this is to happen not government. People are perfectly free to buy fuel efficient cars today if they wish.
- Finally it is a Myth that we can break our foreign oil addiction:
Myths About Breaking Our Foreign Oil Habit (The Washington Post)
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
Actually we don't disagree that much
March 3, 2008 - 10:47 ET by JGsezI never said biofuels can completely replace oil. But making flex-fuel engines is relatively inexpensive. I'm not advocating subsidies or even mandating a percentage of fuel be biofuels. Just mandate flex-fuel engines and see what the market can accomplish.
Many of the prices quoted for corn ethanol assume that corn used for ethanol means it can not be used for feed stock. That is simply not the case because the ethanol can be removed without affecting the feed value of the corn. At least this is what is being done by small CO-OP ethanol plants. This may not be the case for large corporations like ADM. Because we are such a throw-away society, I suspect biofuels can be harvested from many other products and processes. It will most likely be locally or regionally produced so big pipelines will not be that important. Big cities will likely remain dependent upon gasoline unless they can harvest methane from landfills. Oh wait - they don't do landfills in their backyards. Well maybe after decades of abuse by NYC, Staten Island can export fuel to NYC. How is that for irony.
It is also not fair to only include subsidies for biofuels when comparing costs. What is the cost of subsidies on every gallon of gasoline? And what is the total life cycle cost? By that I mean nature-to-nature. Plastic is considered cheap packaging but that is because no one includes the cost to render it back to natural elements. Or even maintaining landfills for thousands of years. MTBE was suppose to make clean gasoline but it also polluted underground aquifers. Cleaning up those aquifers was never included in the cost of the gasoline. Where will all those batteries used in hybrids be a thousand years from now? Would hybrids or electric plug-in cars be cost effective if you were to include the cost of rendering the used batteries to biodegradable elements? I think not. I only skimmed the articles you linked to but I saw nothing about subsidies for oil included in its price which suggests it may not be well reasoned or a valid comparison.
I am agreeing with Mr. Zubrin. Make all vehicles with flex-fuel engines and let the market take its course. If you don't, you are locked into the current oligarchy of big oil and OPEC. And I doubt that farmers are gaming your tax dollars any more than big oil.
Nothing can or will completely replace oil but I'm betting the ingenuity of individuals can greatly reduce the amount of oil used for vehicle fuel. Mandatory flex-fuel engines would allow a possible alternative at little cost - far less than any government subsidy or program. Right now gasoline is driving the price of a barrel of oil. So what would the price of oil be if the US demand for gasoline was 20% less?
But who knows. Maybe it will be just like the last oil crisis. People forget that just before the current rise in price, in the late 90s, oil was below $20 per barrel. The one thing that makes this time different is the growth of China and India. That means we may not see a break in the price of oil unless we have a world wide recession. Plus the price is dependent upon OPEC getting the monopoly production level and price correct. Like any monopoly, they will struggle to preserve the last highest price and will be reluctant to reduce the price until demand falls. Which could well be due to a world wide recession - or worse.
So I say take ethanol out of our processes and products were economical because most likely it is currently a wasted resource. It is the only near term alternative that can at least introduce some amount of competition. At present, any other alternative, like converting coal to a vehicle fuel, requires you to process it to as near to gasoline as possible. Would it be more economical to render it to methanol or methane? I suspect it would be. Then you don't need a pipeline - you just need a rail line to bring the coal to your local plant. And while you are at it, you might also produce your own electrical power with the "clean" coal product. We are the Saudi Arabia of coal.
When they built the oil terminal at Valdez Alaska, one of the big problems was what to do with the ballast and bilge water from the tankers. There just wasn't anything in the available technology that would work to clean the water of oil in the cold environment of Valdez. People said it couldn't be done. The solution was to pump the water from the tankers into tanks with bacteria (or algae - I've forgotten which). Those little devils ate the oil and produced methane. They vented the tanks and burned off the methane. And this was before the EPA. Just scientists and engineers applying science to solve a problem. Their SCADA terminals even had screens to monitor the state of health of their little friends. I'm assuming this is still being done today though EPA may have made them quit burning off the methane which is about how short sighted they can be sometimes.
Policy wonks wail and gnash their teeth seeing only a government solution. Scientists and engineers say, "Let my people go!"
While it is true that mpg for ethanol is less than gasoline, it is also true that todays gasoline engine has benefited from a century of engineering. I should think that difference will become less as engineers put more time working to improve the flex-fuel engine. I doubt if much engineering has been invested to improve the ethanol fuel cycle of the engine. Most likely the major effort has been to make it flexible without degrading the gasoline fuel efficiency.
I say harvest ethanol from corn or anything else that is viable and let OPEC eat their oil. In this game we loose if we play status-quo.
Update: It is also not correct to compare fuels based solely on the BTU rating or content of the fuel. What is more important is how many of those BTUs you can burn. And at what cost.
Indy cars have been running methanol for forty years. In 2006, they changed to 10% ethanol and 90% methanol. In 2007 they went to pure ethanol. In tests, they ran cars with the various fuels and the appropriate engines against each other. All were competitive. So we know it can be none from the stand point of engineering. The costs may be another matter however. But those high mileage tires everyone uses today are the result of engineering by the tire companies based on experience of similar racing teams of the past.
Diesel used to be cheaper than Gas...Why is it more now
March 3, 2008 - 11:12 ET by JayTeeCould it be the Same Govt. that offers Ethanol Subsidies, created more Expensive Diesel Fuel ?
Nah..that would be stupid.....for the Consumer....it would put the Greenies in control of Congress and what they vote for in Congress.
Ethanol Subsidy
March 5, 2008 - 14:56 ET by JGsezAs far as I'm aware, the only pure ethanol subsidy is to the refiners. I believe this was introduced as a poison pill to block ethanol.
In spite of attempts by governments to affect the price of anything, especially commodities, the market will set the price. No amount of government intervention can offset the increased demand of China and India.
See my #4 above. In general, diesel engines are more efficient - especially at idle and certainly for big rigs where engine weight is not significant compared to the weight of the vehicle. Gasoline engines are very inefficient at idle. I wish someone would compute the cost of all those toll boths!
In the spring of 2007, every dollar you spent on gasoline:
The percentage for taxes includes local, state, and federal so will vary based on where you live. As crude oil prices rise, a larger percentage of your dollar is going to the cost of crude oil.
Only 5 to 30 percent of a barrel of oil is gasoline and a smaller portion is dis