Ethanol Power

[FarmRanger]

Fransisco, if Dr. Zubrin is right, then there is an economic argument for ethanol too.
The benefits of biofuels to agriculture are obvious, but if there is a societal economic benefit to be factored in as well, is there a problem with encouraging these industries?

[mustardman]

I have always said that the future in ethanol lies not in using grain but in using cellulose for conversion.

As grain prices rise this makes even more sense.
Amd if global warming slows our ability to grow crops , it will make more sense to use straw,wood chips,swithgrass whatever, better for the environment and better for the bottom line of ethanol plant.

[agstar77]

The latest is going to gasoline directy, rather than makng ethanol. Produced from cellulose, this would be a more sensible approach than using grain.

[Fransisco]

Riddle me this Farmranger, if the economic argument were there, why would the government need to "invest" (I say subsidize) in any of this?

Why wouldn't the free market be all over it?

And why should taxpayers and motorists not have final say on where their money is spent and what goes in their tanks?

These are all rhetorical questions, they answer themselves.

To the average motorist ethanol costs more and nets them less miles per gallon. If someone can convince them there is some kind of 'environmental'or other benefit to this then fine, let them try. But don't force it on people.

I have the same view of organic apples, I personally don't see the benefit, and they cost more. I'm not going to buy them but I have no problem if other people want to.

It should not be the governments job to force things like organic apples, ethanol or the CWB on people that don't want it. That is what is known as a win, lose scenario.

Either one agrees with this principle or one doesn't, there is no agreeing with it in some cases and disagreeing with it in others.

Consistency matters.

Grain farmers like ethanol because they win on that one. They don't like the CWB because in that case they lose. That's the motivation for trying to suck and blow here all at the same time.

Here is a newsflash, it's not just all about 'grain-farmers'. Its about how we all decide we are going to get along with and do business with each other. I am more interested in doing business on the basis of a handshake than at the end of a gun. Because even though I might get the government gun from time to time there are going to be far more instances when it is pointing at me.

I realize we have been on the wrong end of far too many government actions in the past and it feels real good to finally have one working in our favour. But until we honestly realize that it is much better to do business on a voluntary rather than a compulsory basis, no matter what side of the equation we're on, history is going to keep repeating itself.

[Fransisco]

The question I am not sure about is why the lefties are against all of this?

I suspect the answer is because its "corporate" welfare. That its the ADM's of the world who are the ones getting the cheques.

[wilagro]

The question I am not sure about is why the lefties are against all of this?

Who said that the so-called "lefties" are against all this?

The "lefties" just like the "rightards" drive cars, trucks and tractors too. I am sure one's place on the political scale has little to do with liking or not.

[FarmRanger]

I didn't ask for lead to be removed from gasoline either, but there was a good reason for doing it.

If the government hadn't legislated it, there would probably still be leaded gas available at your local service station.

Fransisco, I don't disagree with your free market argument, and if we could level the playing field worldwide and keep protectionism and barriers to trade out of the market, we'd all be better off.
Some justifiable barriers can be for the public good, re: leaded gasoline, sulphur in diesel. Some are just political, benefiting select blocks of voters. Some can claim a public good, while not being able to demonstrate it, but there will always be some kind of government interference in markets.

Being on the right end of ethanol is better than being on the wrong end of an export enhancement program; both cost billions, but only the latter had devastating effects on my bottom line. I just thought I'd post that article from the main stream media because it wasn't bashing ethanol production.

Answering your last question, everyone is a capitalist when it comes to their own money, socialists just tend to be far more generous with someone else’s wallet than their own.

[Fransisco]

Funny I always thought of the NFU as the left.

http://www.nfu.ca/ufq/newsletter/uf_june_2006.pdf

[parsley]

Funny,how wilagro isn't comfortable with the term "left", and considers it pejorative?. I didn't realize it was a negative term.

hmmm.


Isn't left wing exactly what it is? Participation through force?

Now what is wrong with that? All leftwingers obviously approve or they wouldn't support force.

Yet wilagro sounds defensive.

Maybe there's hope yet.
Parsley

[wd9]

Francisco, are you saying the oil and gas sector receives no subsidy or tax benefits and is completely free market?