I'm enjoying the high gas prices. Farm land values in the corn belt are going up, up, up. Yes, I've got some farm land. Yep, ethanol is for real. There are individuals distilling in the tens of thousands of gallons more or less on a hobby level. And the higher gas goes, the more attractive ethanol becomes.
to many of our questions...this is the simple answer. but how on earth would we keep the economy afloat
I don't see a problem with fuel costs, but there are a great many people in the U.S. complaining about gasoline prices, to them I say reduce your consumption or pay up, better yet trade the oil patch and profit from situation, I've never known whining to pay the bills. The post about ethanol is funny; a source of energy that consumes more energy in it's manufacture than it produces. Even if every sq ft of the U.S. was planted with corn it would not yield enough to replace gasoline. Ethanol is Bush's joke on the voting public. If you can profit from it that's great, but don't be fooled into thinking it's the alt. energy solution.
Corn based ethanol will fail miserably, in my opinion. The only reason it is enjoying it's current success is the government subsidy on production and blending and the tariffs on imported sugar based ethanol from Brazil. When those incentives for corn based ethanol are inevitably scaled back, the industry will either figure out how to make cellulosic ethanol economically, or it will be back to MTBE or some other oxygenate as a blendstock for gasoline. Not only is corn a poor feedstock for distilling ethanol (critics argue it takes more energy to make a gallon of corn based ethanol than you get out of it, and the fuel economy from ethanol blended gasoline is less than that of that which was previously blended with MTBE), but it is driving up food prices and fueling inflation without putting much of a dent in the gasoline supply picture.
There is much dis-information about ethanol. First, you don't need corn. Purdue has an enzyme that you can use with plain old grass (cellulose) and more technology will come along. Garbage can work too. Root crops and even high sugar crops like beets are doable. I believe in what I see, not what I read. What I see is ethanol becoming accepted and economical. I live in a town with less than 15,000 and even we have E85 at the pump (about a buck cheaper than regular). Consumers can convert almost any modern car for about $700 to dual fuel use. I'm not suggesting ethanol is THE fix. What I am suggesting is that alternatives will surface as the demand is there. Increasing consumption, dramatically increasing it, will provide the answer. It always has, in energy, and wherever the need arises.
Can you tell us where to find more info on the grass to ethanol? That is a lot better than burning corn.
Ethanol May Not Be the Miracle It's Made Out to Be By JOHN STOSSEL and ANDREW G. SULLIVAN May 2, 2007 â Gas prices are skyrocketing as the high-demand summer season rolls in, and Bloomberg News predicts that some pumps may soon hit four dollars per gallon. Along with high gas prices come the calls for Americans to diversify our energy sources and reduce our dependence on foreign oil. But be skeptical of politicians who tout ethanol as the clean-burning solution to our energy crisis. Are gas prices hitting a "record high"? Don't believe what you hear from the media about that. Reporters often forget to adjust for inflation. Gas prices were higher in the 1920s and the 1980s. Read more about this in "Myths, Lies, and Downright Stupidity." Purchase the book here. The Miracle Solution? The idea that ethanol is the answer is a myth. Ethanol is one thing that both Republican and Democratic candidates agree on this campaign season. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani voice their support for the corn-based fuel, and Sens. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., Barack Obama, D-Ill., and former Sen. John Edwards want the government to subsidize ethanol production. According to former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, "The economics of ethanol make more and more sense." Ethanol "makes sense" to these politicians because, they say, it's a clean and renewable energy source that will slow global warming, protect the environment and reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Plus, it just sounds good: Ethanol's made from corn, and we grow corn, so it just seems natural. But if ethanol made so much sense, we wouldn't have to subsidize it or mandate its consumption. Jerry Taylor of the Cato Institute said, "If you can make a profit in this economy by putting something on the market, the government doesn't need to put a gun to your head." But ethanol producers do need the help of government subsidies if anyone is going to buy their product, because without subsidies it would cost much more than gasoline. And critics point out that the idea that ethanol is good for America in terms of energy prices, foreign policy or the environment is a myth. The Ethanol Process As Jerry Taylor reminded us in his interview on "20/20," when ethanol is produced "it takes a lot of fossil fuels to make the fertilizer, to run the tractor, to build the silo, to get that corn to a processing plant, to run the processing plant." Then there's the energy it takes to move the ethanol around. Because ethanol degrades, it's not possible to transport it in pipelines like we do oil, so using ethanol means putting many more polluting trucks on the road to deliver it. Because of that, a number of recent studies show that it takes just about as much energy to produce ethanol as you get when you burn ethanol. "Its net energy balance is zero, more or less," said Taylor. On top of this, emissions from ethanol-fueled cars are no cleaner for the environment. According to atmospheric scientist Mark Z. Jacobson of Stanford University, a switch to ethanol won't do anything to address climate change and ethanol fumes may actually be worse for public health than the fumes from gas-powered vehicles. Emissions from ethanol-fueled cars contain more of the carcinogenic chemicals formaldehyde and acetaldehyde, Jacobson said, and the vehicles will also boost atmospheric levels of ozone, a major component of smog, which will weaken people's immune systems and cause lung damage. Also, the increase of corn production to make the ethanol will lead to the use of more fertilizer and more pesticides, and that will create more greenhouse gases. Why Do Politicians Like Ethanol? So if ethanol isn't any cheaper or better for the environment, why is it so popular among politicians? "It's no mystery that people who want to be president support the corn ethanol program," said Taylor. "The first caucus is in the state of Iowa, and if you're not willing to sacrifice children to the corn God you will not get out of the Iowa primary with more than 1 percent of the vote." Presidential candidates know that if they want to do well with Midwest voters, they need to buddy up with corn producers. By pushing to subsidize ethanol, candidates are able to keep voters happy in critical Midwestern election states, and seem like friends of the environment. It also lets them convince voters that we're moving toward the hallowed state of "energy independence." When I interviewed Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana, he griped that "we have allowed our dependency on imported petroleum to grow and grow and grow -- that's not healthy for our country." I asked Bayh, "But isn't the ethanol program robbing Peter to pay Paul -- with all of us being the Peters and the corn producers being the Pauls?" "You're currently being robbed to pay sheiks in the Middle East," said Bayh. "Doesn't it make more sense to have Middle Western farms producing America's fuel?" How Much Relief Does Ethanol Offer? But ethanol won't cure our dependence on foreign oil. A study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences says even turning all of America's corn into ethanol would only meet 12 percent of our gasoline demand. And the idea that Middle Eastern countries could just withhold petroleum from us and "hold us hostage" is "nonsense," said Taylor. "Heck, they're held hostage to us -- 80 to 90 percent of their federal revenues come from oil sales [so] they have to sell oil, [because] they have no other business to be engaged in!" He's right. Even if OPEC refuses to sell petroleum to us, all of the world's oil ends up in the same bathtub -- our enemies will sell to SOMEONE who will sell to someone who will sell to us. When a fuel source is expensive and bad for the environment and won't help our foreign policy, then there's no reason to force taxpayers to foot the bill for producing it. "This is a naked transfer program designed to take money from people who buy corn and to give it to people who grow corn and people who make ethanol for a living. That's all it is," said Taylor.
Actually we are very close to the 1980 gasoline price in real terms. http://www.fintrend.com/inflation/Inflation_Rate/Gasoline_Inflation.asp If prices remain at this level then the average price will actually exceed the 1980 level. The 20/20 post above about ethanol says not to believe the hype of high gasoline prices because prices were higher in real terms in 1920s and 1980s but ironically two major crashes happened in those two periods.
Does not sound like you aware of any of the issues and if you are, you need some work on your communication skills. It's pretty basic. Putting up a refinery in North America is out of the question. The areas where it does make sense to put up, considering the costs & regulations, contain political risk. You wanna claim gas prices are high, fine. Then curb your demand. But you won't. Neither will the idiot who financed his H3. Hence the gas prices are not really that high, just not as low. Wake up and face the truth. USA has enjoyed low gas prices for decades. Prices are still not to the levels they should be, for example, in comparison to Europe. What kind of a solution do you expect? Mr. Bush to go over to Saudi Arabia and negotiate a special deal, like Carter did back in 70s? Why would he do that when big oil can make a larger nominal dollar amount with their razor thin margins?