Global Warming - It's Our Fault

[Unrepresented]

Sounds great to me, as long as the industry is responsible for covering all of their externalities.

The massive increase in prices from folks no longer being able to ignore large amounts of damage would quickly reduce our fossil fuel usage drastically.

No more paying taxes for the EPA, big oil will do all the work on their own dime.

 

[aborgman]

The ethanol frenzy started well before 2008. It was most definitely motivated in large part by a push from environmentalists to provide an alternative to fossil fuel.

There isn't a single environmental group in the top 10 corn ethanol lobbying groups, recently or long term.


For 2012 -

1) American Farm Bureau Federation & state organizations - $705,438
2) National Corn Growers Assn - $254,000
3) Cargill Inc - $247,500
4) Archer Daniels Midland - $227,850
5) POET LLC - $176,000
6) Biotechnology Industry Organization - $138,750
7) Growth Energy - $130,500
8) AG Processing - $109,000
9) National Farmers Union - $72,750
10) Louis Dreyfus Corp - $46,500


The major push in US ethanol use came from the Energy Policy Act of 2005. That bill was widely HATED by environmentalists, and widely championed by the energy industry.

The Union of Concerned Scientists said:

"Despite all of our hard work, however, the Congress chose to largely follow the path of a 19th century fossil-fueled past instead of crafting an energy bill for the 21st century that would lead us to a clean energy future."

National Republicans for Environmental Protection Association:

"It really gives a short shrift to conservation, and it still continues to subsidize the well-established oil and gas industries that really don’t need subsidizing"

 

[Unrepresented]

The Union of Concerned Scientists said:

"Despite all of our hard work, however, the Congress chose to largely follow the path of a 19th century fossil-fueled past instead of crafting an energy bill for the 21st century that would lead us to a clean energy future."

I donate to them. I feel like I actually see something accomplished anytime they actually get something published.

 

[BawanaRik]

Because investor speculations are a far more sound way of running a market [del]into the ground[/del] than government oversight.

I for one don't believe this statement.

The one sure way to price gas correctly is to not buy it until it hits a price that you deem fair.

That way no one ever pays a penny more than they want to.

 

[BawanaRik]

Sounds great to me, as long as the industry is responsible for covering all of their externalities.

The massive increase in prices from folks no longer being able to ignore large amounts of damage would quickly reduce our fossil fuel usage drastically.

I feel the consumer should shoulder some of the burden. Without them there would be no "Big Oil".

I'm a big fan of recovering the price of these externalaties.

 

[DerHoggz]

I for one don't believe this statement.

The one sure way to price gas correctly is to not buy it until it hits a price that you deem fair.

That way no one ever pays a penny more than they want to.

That really doesn't work for what is essentially a required commodity for most people to function within the established society.

 

[DerHoggz]

I feel the consumer should shoulder some of the burden. Without them there would be no "Big Oil".

So they should keep on using us as they have to leverage themselves into the position of power which allows them to abuse us?

 

[BawanaRik]

So they should keep on using us as they have to leverage themselves into the position of power which allows them to abuse us?

All you need to do to stop being "used" is to stop buy any petroleum products. That just might include electricity and a few other things like milk shakes. But you get the picture.

People lived like that for eons. You can start now.

 

[DerHoggz]

All you need to do to stop being "used" is to stop buy any petroleum products. That just might include electricity and a few other things like milk shakes. But you get the picture.

People lived like that for eons. You can start now.

If you want to live like that, why don't you just move to the Middle Ages?

 

[BawanaRik]

No more paying taxes for the EPA, big oil will do all the work on their own dime.

Shouldn't the consumers who created the demand for "Big Oil" be responsible?

And just where do you thing "big oil" will go to get the money to pay for any cleanups etc?

The consumer.

 

[BawanaRik]

If you want to live like that, why don't you just move to the Middle Ages?

I don't feel I'm being "used" by paying market pricing.

And BTW people ARE moving off grid. One of my friends has access to large amount of methane generating material and is trying to use it to heat her house.

The paradigm of hitting up the local Chinese restaurant for their used waste oil has passed it's shelf life but there are people doing more than complaining.

It is better to light a single candle than just complain about how dark it is.

 

[hbarcat]

There isn't a single environmental group in the top 10 corn ethanol lobbying groups, recently or long term.


For 2012 -

1) American Farm Bureau Federation & state organizations - $705,438
2) National Corn Growers Assn - $254,000
3) Cargill Inc - $247,500
4) Archer Daniels Midland - $227,850
5) POET LLC - $176,000
6) Biotechnology Industry Organization - $138,750
7) Growth Energy - $130,500
8) AG Processing - $109,000
9) National Farmers Union - $72,750
10) Louis Dreyfus Corp - $46,500

1) The motivation for ethanol does not imply a direct 1 to 1 relationship with registered lobbying groups. We don't know what companies or organizations are funding these groups or who they are allied with.

2) The amount of money here is chump change. That fact alone demonstrates that other influences are likely to have far more effect on policy than these groups. Again, the real money is certain to be operating behind the scenes, with these lobbying bodies being merely front organizations. That is how the system works.

3) Even so, the organizations on this list represent exactly the brand new lobbying groups I talked about as springing up to take advantage of the new policies. If ethanol does replace oil, then these groups will represent companies that will be raking in the billions of dollars that the petroleum industry once did.

4) Billions of dollars is truly a lot of motivation to make sure that global warming scares as many people as possible. They are the newly created counterparts to the fossil fuel industry that is strongly motivated to make sure as many people as possible believe that global warming is a hoax.

The major push in US ethanol use came from the Energy Policy Act of 2005. That bill was widely HATED by environmentalists, and widely championed by the energy industry.

The Union of Concerned Scientists said:

"Despite all of our hard work, however, the Congress chose to largely follow the path of a 19th century fossil-fueled past instead of crafting an energy bill for the 21st century that would lead us to a clean energy future."

National Republicans for Environmental Protection Association:

"It really gives a short shrift to conservation, and it still continues to subsidize the well-established oil and gas industries that really don’t need subsidizing"

And yet . . . .

Mike Mitchell was once a true believer in ethanol as a homegrown solution to foreign oil imports. He owns gas stations, and he went further than most, installing expensive blender pumps that let customers choose E15, E20 and all the way up to E85.

The result was a variation on the old adage, "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink."

"We're environmental people and we kind of jumped on the bandwagon early, and it bit us," Mitchell says.

[ . . . ]

Philip Verleger, an economist who tracks the oil industry
Verleger [ . . . ] says the switch to E10 was driven by the Clean Air Act to reduce smog, and it worked pretty well.

The switch to E15, however, is being driven by the renewable fuel mandate, which directs the EPA to require a greater volume of ethanol in gasoline every year, pretty much, no matter what.

Even some environmental groups don't like that mandate, because corn ethanol requires so much energy and water to produce.

"The need for the ethanol program is gone," Verleger says, "but the thing is ... once you get something it's very hard to undo it."

[ . . . ]

Bob Dinneen [president of the Renewable Fuels Association, a trade group for the corn ethanol industry] [ . . . ] says, "this is the way Congress envisioned the mandate working: more and more ethanol over time in a gallon of fuel, and less and less petroleum."

http://www.npr.org/2013/04/01/175871273/epas-push-for-more-ethanol-could-be-too-little-too-late

Countless stories just like this one can be easily found.

I reiterate: The push to ethanol began in earnest well before 2008. It was well under way in the early 90's and it was being driven by environmentalists. The corn industry simply saw an opportunity to cash in on a new (and lucrative) demand for their existing product so they naturally jumped on the bandwagon. Once the ball got rolling, the profitable new industry to be in was ethanol refining. Many environmentalists are changing their minds about ethanol but it's too late because the industry has now taken on a life of its own and it isn't going to go away.

 

[BawanaRik]

Ethanol puts out out more CO2 than gasoline. And it only gives about 2/3 the energy.

And it takes a lot of energy to make corn based ethanol. I wouldn't be surprised if it takes a gallon of gas to make a gallon of ethanol.

The environmental impact of ethanol far out weighs any imagined benefit.

 

[aborgman]

I feel the consumer should shoulder some of the burden. Without them there would be no "Big Oil".

They would shoulder the burden through increased fuel costs. I don't expect the industry to just eat their externalities.

 

[aborgman]

1) The motivation for ethanol does not imply a direct 1 to 1 relationship with registered lobbying groups. We don't know what companies or organizations are funding these groups or who they are allied with.

Yes, we DO know who funds agribusiness like Cargill and ADM. We DO know who funds the American Farm Bureau.

2) The amount of money here is chump change. That fact alone demonstrates that other influences are likely to have far more effect on policy than these groups. Again, the real money is certain to be operating behind the scenes, with these lobbying bodies being merely front organizations. That is how the system works.

Yes - major agribusiness like Cargill and ADM, as well as farm representation organizations that have existed for 100 years like the AFB and Nations Farmers Union are merely front organizations....

3) Even so, the organizations on this list represent exactly the brand new lobbying groups I talked about as springing up to take advantage of the new policies. If ethanol does replace oil, then these groups will represent companies that will be raking in the billions of dollars that the petroleum industry once did.

These groups were mostly raking in piles of money before, and saw a potential increase in income.

4) Billions of dollars is truly a lot of motivation to make sure that global warming scares as many people as possible. They are the newly created counterparts to the fossil fuel industry that is strongly motivated to make sure as many people as possible believe that global warming is a hoax.

Agribusiness and ethanol producers using false environmentalism as a way to push profit aren't environmentalists - no matter what words are coming out of their mouth.

The newly created counterparts to the fossil fuel industry are largely other, large, national and multinational corporations driven by profits and not environmental concern.

I reiterate: The push to ethanol began in earnest well before 2008. It was well under way in the early 90's and it was being driven by environmentalists.

You seem to be conflating the push for ethanol as an oxygenate additive (and replacement for MTBE) with the large scale push for ethanol as a fuel. They are two completely different things, pushed by two very distinct populations.

 

[BawanaRik]

They would shoulder the burden through increased fuel costs. I don't expect the industry to just eat their externalities.

I agree this would happen.

And I believe oxygenate is a polite word for more CO2

 

[MatticusMania]

All you need to do to stop being "used" is to stop buy any petroleum products. That just might include electricity and a few other things like milk shakes. But you get the picture.

People lived like that for eons. You can start now.

Thats ridiculous! We have engines to run!

 

[96tbird]

All you need to do to stop being "used" is to stop buy any petroleum products. That just might include electricity and a few other things like milk shakes. But you get the picture.

People lived like that for eons. You can start now.

Ok you start. Unload your computer, bass, amp, cabinets, car, bicycle tires, etc etc etc.

If you respond to this you still have your puter and are not living by your advice. Bye bye.

 

[aborgman]

And I believe oxygenate is a polite word for more CO2

Nope - it makes gasoline burn cleaner and produce less CO

 

[Tituscrow]

Nope - it makes gasoline burn cleaner and produce less CO

Can I just say, I love your posts.

Seriously.