Members Crescent Seven Posted December 18, 2007 Members Share Posted December 18, 2007 Whatever, they're just some fish and {censored}. From Yahoo News: JEFFERSON, Iowa - Because of rising demand for ethanol, American farmers are growing more corn than at any time since World War II. And sea life in the Gulf of Mexico is paying the price. The nation's corn crop is fertilized with millions of pounds of nitrogen-based fertilizer. And when that nitrogen runs off fields in Corn Belt states, it makes its way to the Mississippi River and eventually pours into the Gulf, where it contributes to a growing "dead zone" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bholder Posted December 18, 2007 Members Share Posted December 18, 2007 Ethanol doesn't make much sense, really, especially not corn-based ethanol. Gimmick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BEAD Posted December 18, 2007 Members Share Posted December 18, 2007 This seems like more of a pesticide problem than a corn or ethanol problem. Pesticides used to farm the corn as cheaply as possible killed the fish. I'm not championing ethanol, but this criticism doesn't really seem to add up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bassman1956 Posted December 18, 2007 Members Share Posted December 18, 2007 Sugar cane will grow in areas here. And has a far greater ethanol yield per acre/dollar invested/energy per final product/etc. I'd like to see us line the edges of all the fields of the south with solar panel farming. Minimal compared to the overall area. Maximum in comparison to the total present usage and level of technology. And it means that in years like this, when most of the south has suffered a drought that will take years to come back from, the farmers still had a product, and a bountiful one at that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BEAD Posted December 18, 2007 Members Share Posted December 18, 2007 Sugar cane will grow in areas here. And has a far greater ethanol yield per acre/dollar invested/energy per final product/etc. I'd like to see us line the edges of all the fields of the south with solar panel farming. Minimal compared to the overall area. Maximum in comparison to the total present usage and level of technology. And it means that in years like this, when most of the south has suffered a drought that will take years to come back from, the farmers still had a product, and a bountiful one at that. That sounds nice, but if i was economically viable wouldn't farmers do it more often already? You wouldn't want the gov't using taxpayer $ to buy solar panels for farmers to use to sell electricity back to the taxpayers, wouldja? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bassman1956 Posted December 18, 2007 Members Share Posted December 18, 2007 That sounds nice, but if i was economically viable wouldn't farmers do it more often already? You wouldn't want the gov't using taxpayer $ to buy solar panels for farmers to use to sell electricity back to the taxpayers, wouldja? Why not? What the hell is the program now anyways? They pay them not to grow certain crops. And regardless of what program they are on, the gov will have to bail out nearly all of them this year, with no product for the money spent. Why not pay them to grow electricity as part of their package? Converts waste heat, which is helping to cause the drought, into electricity. Gives farmers that they will need to seriously bail out a significant partial income. Not as volatile as the pig farms, and a bit more dependable. Productive, on average, regardless of the changes in weather these areas normally experience. Really could be a win-win-win-win, as long as energy lobbyists are brought in and sold on the idea. If not, they'd be a constant source of IBS. Still, all-in-all, a very workable plan. And as a partial solution to everyone, not a full solution to anyone, far more sellable, not compromising or firewalling anyone else's plans. Easily adaptable. Easily scalable. Easily built in stages. Easily improved upon by building in stages. And very financeable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members J. Posted December 18, 2007 Members Share Posted December 18, 2007 Ethanol doesn't make much sense, really, especially not corn-based ethanol. Gimmick. A man after my own heart. Ethanol is a good business to get into now, with generous gov't subsidies and mandates. Here in MN, all gasoline has to have at least 10% ethanol content. If it wasn't for the subsidies and mandates, ethanol would fall flat on its face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members REMUS Posted December 18, 2007 Members Share Posted December 18, 2007 ....so short sighted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members 82Daion Posted December 18, 2007 Members Share Posted December 18, 2007 A man after my own heart. Ethanol is a good business to get into now, with generous gov't subsidies and mandates. Here in MN, all gasoline has to have at least 10% ethanol content. If it wasn't for the subsidies and mandates, ethanol would fall flat on its face. +1 It's just a thinly veiled farm subsidy, not a sustainable alternative fuel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bassman1956 Posted December 18, 2007 Members Share Posted December 18, 2007 Frankly, I work at a national lab, and I wish they'd get off their ass and address this here. They could try it! They are a perfect trial plant for such a scheme. We have the acreage. (Almost 7000.) And the need: we use more juice than the surrounding towns. The lab could easily be used as a proving ground for co-production such as this, except, we are too far north and west and our winters are long, gray, and suck. But the summers at least could prove the idea!!! And with the mentality of the 70's when they were formed, this would be JUST the thing they would try. But now, today, too many committies worried about too many public opinions and I don't think you could get any one office in government interested regardless of what you did. Face it: Bush is big money energy period. This would be thought of as a threat, and as such, an undermining agent to big energy,and as such, a threat to the current powers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members REMUS Posted December 18, 2007 Members Share Posted December 18, 2007 Doesn't his family own circa 5 power stations and one of the dirtiest in the US? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Crescent Seven Posted December 18, 2007 Author Members Share Posted December 18, 2007 Face it: Bush is big money energy period. This would be thought of as a threat, and as such, an undermining agent to big energy,and as such, a threat to the current powers. Yeah, that's why the National Renewable Energy Lab was all but closed during Clinton's tenure, and is now hoppin' like mad. I used to drive by it every day on my way to high school in the 90's. It looked like an unattended substation. Over the last few years they've added a new gate and larger parking lot, and it's lit up like a Roman candle right now, I can see it from here... Kinda odd for a lab like that to be funded like that by a viceroy of Big Oil, dontcha think? C7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bluescout Posted December 18, 2007 Members Share Posted December 18, 2007 Silly Wabbits, everyone knows that if there's a dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico it's because George Bush pushed the "dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico" button. :poke: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members lug Posted December 18, 2007 Members Share Posted December 18, 2007 Doesn't his family own circa 5 power stations and one of the dirtiest in the US? Of course they do! They pollute for fun! Anyone who says different is part of the vast right wing conspiracy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members REMUS Posted December 18, 2007 Members Share Posted December 18, 2007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members lug Posted December 18, 2007 Members Share Posted December 18, 2007 The Bush family doesn't own any power stations that I'm aware of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members willsellout Posted December 18, 2007 Members Share Posted December 18, 2007 {censored} it. No matter what we do we lose. Lets just party until the world implodes! Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jazz Ad Posted December 18, 2007 Members Share Posted December 18, 2007 Using corn to produce ethanol is simply dumb.We use beets around here, they do much better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Perfessor Posted December 18, 2007 Members Share Posted December 18, 2007 The entire country of Brazille uses 100% ethanol don't they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jazz Ad Posted December 18, 2007 Members Share Posted December 18, 2007 Yeah almost 100 %. Which is one of the main reasons why they destroy their forests. There is no simple solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Perfessor Posted December 18, 2007 Members Share Posted December 18, 2007 Yeah almost 100 %. Which is one of the main reasons why they destroy their forests. There is no simple solution. I thought cattle ranchers were doing in the rain forest in Brazille. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bassman1956 Posted December 18, 2007 Members Share Posted December 18, 2007 The entire country of Brazille uses 100% ethanol don't they? Not 100%, but the majority. And most of it from cane, because of the higher yields. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members lug Posted December 18, 2007 Members Share Posted December 18, 2007 Yeah almost 100 %. Which is one of the main reasons why they destroy their forests. There is no simple solution. We had to do something! Well, we meant well. We had to wake everyone up to the problem! These and many other apologetic responses from people whose passion caused them to think with their hearts instead of their heads and came up with simplistic solutions that made good sound bites can be found at www.atleastwetriedtohelp.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted December 18, 2007 CMS Author Share Posted December 18, 2007 Odd. I thought it was an excess of dihydrogen monoxide that was killing off the sea life in the Gulf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RSBro Posted December 18, 2007 Members Share Posted December 18, 2007 {censored}in' hippies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.