Comments on: New York Times Attacks Corn-Based Ethanol http://ecotality.com/life/2007/10/02/new-york-times-attacks-corn-based-ethanol/ EcoDevelopments you can use and invest in. Fri, 19 Mar 2010 11:42:15 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: BurlHaigwoodCFDC http://ecotality.com/life/2007/10/02/new-york-times-attacks-corn-based-ethanol/comment-page-1/#comment-139 BurlHaigwoodCFDC Thu, 04 Oct 2007 12:58:14 +0000 http://ecotality.com/life/2007/10/02/new-york-times-attacks-corn-based-ethanol/#comment-139 The New York Times recent coverage of ethanol has been an absolute propaganda lead parade of age old myths and half truths about ethanol that also lacks any context, perspectives, or comparisons to help their readers understand this very complex issue. When people talk about increasing the price of food one should also realize processing, packing and transportation account for 80% of the price of food. Also consider since 2002 consumers have spent $250 billon more on higher gasoline prices and $600 billion on a war that is supposed to protect our oil supplies and keep prices low. All money is green, even if it is our tax dollars. Research also shows energy prices have twice the impact on food prices when compared to ethanol. So let’s bring the food vs. fuel debate to an end and once again focus on the real issue for many consumers “gasoline vs. food.” Acting USDA Secretary Chuck Conner recently said "clearly ethanol demand is having some impact" on food price inflation, but the fuel is getting too much of the blame for what's happening in grocery store aisles. Food prices have increased about 2.7 percent in each of the last three years. But a jump of between 3.5 percent and 4.5 percent is expected this year before retreating a bit to between 3 percent and 4 percent in 2008. Global weather conditions, including droughts in Australia, as well as rising demand in China and elsewhere drove up wheat prices. And the recent record highs for retail oil prices also add to inflation by increasing the costs of everything from packaging to transportation.” A couple questions readers should pose to themselves with regard to all of the recent negative press articles about ethanol. If the ethanol program is not working, why is there a glut? If the polls show consumers are willing to fight climate change and pay more for cleaner and better fuels – where are their choices at the pump? If there are other good choices for alternative fuels beyond ethanol (e.g., hydrogen, natural gas, electricity) why don’t automakers produce those vehicles? If there were performance concerns with 10% ethanol blends why do all the auto makers warranty its use, some up to 100,000 miles? If corrosion or safety were an issue with ethanol, why are there six million Flexible Fuel Vehicles (85% ethanol capable) on the road with the same warranty? If you were in charge of changing fuel policy and had to come up with a fuel that was compatible with existing cars (liquid) and could be sold at every existing gasoline station (liquid), could get to market fast, could use diverse feedstocks from all regions, and was already proven to work after 30 years of market place deployment – what would you choose? That’s why we have ethanol, that’s why it’s working, and that’s why you see all of the negative press. Ethanol is lowering gasoline prices. According to the The Associated Press, October 5, 2006, “Nigel Gault, an economist at the Massachusetts consultancy Global Insight, estimated consumer spending will get a $1 billion monthly boost for every sustained, 10-cent drop in the retail price of gasoline. That means the recent 70-cent drop in gas prices from August to September, if sustained, will free up $7 billion per month.” And finally, where is the money and time for all of this research against ethanol coming from? Enough said. The New York Times needs to go back to its leadership position of supporting the free market and entrepreneurship, consumer protection and help Americans understand how they can get to where they want to go. In the meantime I suggest folks Google the "Big Oil's Big Stall On Ethanol" and the "Ethanol Fact Book" The New York Times recent coverage of ethanol has been an absolute propaganda lead parade of age old myths and half truths about ethanol that also lacks any context, perspectives, or comparisons to help their readers understand this very complex issue. When people talk about increasing the price of food one should also realize processing, packing and transportation account for 80% of the price of food. Also consider since 2002 consumers have spent $250 billon more on higher gasoline prices and $600 billion on a war that is supposed to protect our oil supplies and keep prices low. All money is green, even if it is our tax dollars. Research also shows energy prices have twice the impact on food prices when compared to ethanol. So let’s bring the food vs. fuel debate to an end and once again focus on the real issue for many consumers “gasoline vs. food.”
Acting USDA Secretary Chuck Conner recently said “clearly ethanol demand is having some impact” on food price inflation, but the fuel is getting too much of the blame for what’s happening in grocery store aisles. Food prices have increased about 2.7 percent in each of the last three years. But a jump of between 3.5 percent and 4.5 percent is expected this year before retreating a bit to between 3 percent and 4 percent in 2008. Global weather conditions, including droughts in Australia, as well as rising demand in China and elsewhere drove up wheat prices. And the recent record highs for retail oil prices also add to inflation by increasing the costs of everything from packaging to transportation.”
A couple questions readers should pose to themselves with regard to all of the recent negative press articles about ethanol. If the ethanol program is not working, why is there a glut? If the polls show consumers are willing to fight climate change and pay more for cleaner and better fuels – where are their choices at the pump? If there are other good choices for alternative fuels beyond ethanol (e.g., hydrogen, natural gas, electricity) why don’t automakers produce those vehicles? If there were performance concerns with 10% ethanol blends why do all the auto makers warranty its use, some up to 100,000 miles? If corrosion or safety were an issue with ethanol, why are there six million Flexible Fuel Vehicles (85% ethanol capable) on the road with the same warranty?
If you were in charge of changing fuel policy and had to come up with a fuel that was compatible with existing cars (liquid) and could be sold at every existing gasoline station (liquid), could get to market fast, could use diverse feedstocks from all regions, and was already proven to work after 30 years of market place deployment – what would you choose? That’s why we have ethanol, that’s why it’s working, and that’s why you see all of the negative press. Ethanol is lowering gasoline prices. According to the The Associated Press, October 5, 2006, “Nigel Gault, an economist at the Massachusetts consultancy Global Insight, estimated consumer spending will get a $1 billion monthly boost for every sustained, 10-cent drop in the retail price of gasoline. That means the recent 70-cent drop in gas prices from August to September, if sustained, will free up $7 billion per month.”
And finally, where is the money and time for all of this research against ethanol coming from? Enough said. The New York Times needs to go back to its leadership position of supporting the free market and entrepreneurship, consumer protection and help Americans understand how they can get to where they want to go. In the meantime I suggest folks Google the “Big Oil’s Big Stall On Ethanol” and the “Ethanol Fact Book”

]]> By: Herodotus http://ecotality.com/life/2007/10/02/new-york-times-attacks-corn-based-ethanol/comment-page-1/#comment-135 Herodotus Tue, 02 Oct 2007 21:46:28 +0000 http://ecotality.com/life/2007/10/02/new-york-times-attacks-corn-based-ethanol/#comment-135 The feature story of National Geographic this month makes the same assertions and weighs the pros and cons of switchgrass, biomass, and algae. The feature story of National Geographic this month makes the same assertions and weighs the pros and cons of switchgrass, biomass, and algae.

]]> By: Lois Zendarski http://ecotality.com/life/2007/10/02/new-york-times-attacks-corn-based-ethanol/comment-page-1/#comment-131 Lois Zendarski Tue, 02 Oct 2007 18:04:22 +0000 http://ecotality.com/life/2007/10/02/new-york-times-attacks-corn-based-ethanol/#comment-131 Regarding the ethanol debate, it has become the classic mantra.."food vs: fuel". I can tell you that I have not seen one drop of ethanol in my area. It is just not available. I can also report that my feed prices for the horses have gone up about $1.50 per 100 pounds this year due ethanol production. Corn is going to the ethanol plants and not into our livestock. We are now supplementing other grains when we can in an attempt to decrease the need for corn. Where did our country's CONSERVATION PROGRAMS go? Regarding the ethanol debate, it has become the classic mantra..”food vs: fuel”. I can tell you that I have not seen one drop of ethanol in my area. It is just not available.

I can also report that my feed prices for the horses have gone up about $1.50 per 100 pounds this year due ethanol production. Corn is going to the ethanol plants and not into our livestock.

We are now supplementing other grains when we can in an attempt to decrease the need for corn.

Where did our country’s CONSERVATION PROGRAMS go?

]]>