Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#28
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "RHF" wrote in message om... Actually a 5% Ethanol / 95% Gasoline results in a 5% reduction of imported foreign oil. This also results in a 5% reduction in Petro-Dollars spent abroad and more Dollars spent internally in the USofA. Ethanol has about half the fuel value as gasoline. Gasahol, at least around here, is 90% gasoline, 10% alcohol. If there's any merit to the arguement that gasahol reduces imports by 5%, it's because 5% is half of 10%. Another way of saying the same thing is an efficent car will get 5% better gas mileage with gasoline as compared to gasahol. Unfortunately, there's less to the oil import reduction than it seems. Growing corn uses a considerable amount of fertilizer. Fertilizer produced with oil, much of imported. Cultivating it uses fuel. Not to mention the fuel needed to transport the stuff, ferment it and distill it. In the end, ethanol production justs transfers alot of fossil fuels into a "renewable resource". YES it is a Farm Subsidy but it creates many more "JOBS" between the Farm and the Pump. How many jobs does ethanol production create? Corn production is highly automated. I ezpect the same is true of the distillers. But, the ethanol subsidy needs to take less than four dollars a year from every American to total over a billion dollars. I'm sure we lose more than a billion dollars a year in discretionary income every year to the ethanol subsidy. I also have no doubt that redirecting a billion dollars into the pockets of a few fat cats costs more jobs than it "creates". IMHO: It is "Better" to spend a few Foreign Aid Dollars here at Home. Foriegn aid? Are you comparing the mega-farmers and Archer-Daniels-Midland to a bunch of tinhorn dictators? Well, OK. California (where I live) needs to start growing Corn for Fuel (Ethanol) and Manufacturing Ethanol in-state for it's own internal consumption. Is California an efficent corn producer like Iowa or Illinois? I thought fruits domininated California's agricultural production. I suppose you could distill grapes and oranges into fuel if you spend enough money. I suppose if it was an efficent use of resources, somebody would be doing it profitably on their own now. I do believe taking money from people for things they don't want will almost certainly cost more jobs than it creates. Why pay someone else for what you can do yourself ? Because someone else can do it cheaper and better? Because forcing people to spend money on ethanol means they have less money to spend on take out pizza or new vacuum cleaners or shortwave radios? Because I'm tired of transfering wealth to well connected fat cats? Every Gallon of California Ethanol Fuels a New California Economy. ~ RHF . I can't say ethanol didn't create work for me. I got to replace a few fuel pumps and fix cars with carb trouble after Illinois decided to drop the gas tax on gasohol and make it cheaper than gasoline. But that's like saying the government ought to subsidize tire slashing to create jobs in Akron. Frank Dresser |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Coast Guard Searching For Boaters Off Egmont Key | CB | |||
Coast Guard Band Usage Question | Scanner | |||
6th Annual East Coast vs. West Coast Oldies Show online at Rock-it Radio | Broadcasting | |||
Delivery / Pick-Up...Service...West Coast to East Coast & South! | Boatanchors | |||
Bonafied Proof of LIFE AFTER DEATH -- Coal Mine Rescue | Shortwave |