RSS
Ecos and Their Ethanol Slip
Mark Steyn on the dumbness of eco-warrioring "chickenfeedhawks".
Money Q:
"When you divert 28 percent of U.S. grain into fuel production, and when you artificially make its value as fuel higher than its value as food, why be surprised that you’ve suddenly got less to eat? Or, to be more precise, it’s not “you” who’s got less to eat but those starving peasants in distant lands you claim to care so much about."
Money Q:
"When you divert 28 percent of U.S. grain into fuel production, and when you artificially make its value as fuel higher than its value as food, why be surprised that you’ve suddenly got less to eat? Or, to be more precise, it’s not “you” who’s got less to eat but those starving peasants in distant lands you claim to care so much about."
posted by Spencerblog at
6:09 AM
24 Comments:
Ah, the unintended consequences of shortsighted Liberalism…
This post has been removed by the author.
We've already been over this, Dave. And you lost the argumnet last time too.
Feelings-driven Liberalism has no place in our energy reform any more than it does in waging war. It always ends up backfiring somehow. Always.
This post has been removed by the author.
David,
Why don't you just admit that as of today, it takes more energy to produce ethanol than ethanol gives off? That's a simple fact.
So will 20 times more efficient actually cause ethanol to give off more energy than the energy put into the making of ethanol? Or will it get just about even?
And David, did you also think the soaring price of ethanol (ethanol costs more than gas right now) might actually be part of the reason gas is so high? Which in your own supporting documentation from NY Times states is a reason for prices rising. So in effect, you are agreeing that rising ethanol prices cause rises in everything else because they rise the price of oil.
Thanks for proving R's point for him!
This post has been removed by the author.
Good stuff, Jonas. Thanks.
Right, Dave. Ethanol isn’t fully here yet. So, as always is the case with Libism, the Lib rush to legislation is premature while failing to consider other ramifications. This is the point of both the article and the thinking folks here.
Bottom line: Emotion-fueled Liberalism in making policy is stupid. How many times must we learn this same lesson before people preclude Libs from such things?
This post has been removed by the author.
Huh?? Kinda shrill, wouldn't you say, Dishonest Dave?
David,
I'm not trying to knock your argument here about ethanol's future possibility, but I just don't get how we can say the technology is close, so we'll get there soon.
Didn't we say this with cancer and HIV about 20/30 years ago? How much closer are we?
I'll fully admit we developed cloning at a fast rate (which would prove my point wrong); but my only thing is that I feel we should have waited for the technology to get there before making it law.
I just feel if we are going to gamble on technology, lets gamble on very clean burning coal cause we all know the US is basically the middle east when considering coal supplies. And I say that because it's a known fact US farmers won't be able to handle the ethanol demand in 10 years, so we'll be importing ethanol just like we do oil. Real independent.
This post has been removed by the author.
The amount being invested in research to take ethanol and coal to the next level is tiny compared with the money we are wasting in Iraq.
False conflation. One has nothing to do with the other. It’s not as if the war were to end tomorrow that money would be diverted to energy research. But you know this, dontcha Liar Dave?
Is your every waking moment consumed by your petty hatred for Bush due to your hurt feelings? You should really talk to a professional about having that anger checked. It can’t be good for you.
This post has been removed by the author.
Every extra day we are in the war is one less day we are funding energy research. Just a few days of war budget would be a major influx for energy research.
Again with the false conflation, DD. Do you lie to your clients as you regularly do here in order to "win" an argument?
Don’t worry about what I do. You wouldn’t believe me anyway if I told you. I intentional don’t ever put my personal stuff out there. Not that I have anything to hide but it has been my experience that lowly Libs, such as yourself, seize on people’s personal info and turn it into distractions and personal attacks whenever you are losing an argument. Just exactly like we have seen you do here many, many times, in virtually every discussion. So by my not sharing my info I remove that ammo from your underhanded Lib bag of tricks and keep others focused on your childish Lib dishonesty, is all. No biggie.
Besides, this isn’t about me; it’s about saving our society from the harmful idiotology of Liberalism.
This post has been removed by the author.
See what I mean. Lol…
Point.
And your sure do have an elitist attitude in the way you look down upon American workers. That’s not very Lib of you.
Me and my Rightie buddies, we see value in every honest job and everyone who is gainfully employed. We hold the same regard for the burger flipper as we do the CEO.
I guess it’s true, I am better than you. And it doesn’t matter what either of us do for a living, now does it? Imagine that…
And you have proven that all that "education" means nothing.
Point.
This post has been removed by the author.
You wanta talk about shortcomings? You hate America and our President… you insult decent, honest, hardworking people’s education and their jobs... call people childish names when you suffer an intellectual beating here… you are a repeat offender convicted liar… you teach kids that winning at ALL cost is the way to go… You are a man of ill character and posses zero integrity. You are a mess, a pathetic shell of a man, David Diano. I really mean that. And no amount of “education” or career success will change this.
This post has been removed by the author.
And worst of all you're a Lib.
Oh, and your childish denials here don’t change the truth. Really, all that Lib “education” and you’re still just as petty and dishonest and intellectually and emotionally stunted as an angry third grader. Lol…
Hey, you never told us if you lie to your clients regularly as you do here? Given the character and complete lack of integrity you have displayed here, I’m gonna have to go with Yes, until I see proof to the contrary.
This post has been removed by the author.
I think you should let your clients read your “honest” posts on this blog and let them decide for themselves. (snicker)
This isn't about me; it's about Libism destroying our nation.
Thank GOP someone is thinking...
WASHINGTON -AP- Senate Republicans want the Environmental Protection Agency to consider waiving the country's ethanol production mandate amid rising food prices.
Twenty-two Republican senators, including presidential candidate John McCain, have sent a letter to the EPA. They said the agency has the authority to waive, or restructure, a law passed by Congress requiring a five-fold increase in U.S. ethanol production by 2022.
Lawmakers are ramping up questions about the potential unintended consequences of using corn for fuel amid rising global demand for food.
Post a Comment
<< Home