Originally Posted By: Tempest
Quote:
But making excessive unbalanced claims in either direction is both false and polarizing
You mean like:
"...more or less all aspects of science and engineering there are experts that blow away the knowledge of the folks on the "other side"."
OK, you're right. But the spirit of my comment still holds true no matter what.
Originally Posted By: Tempest
Quote:
"Free market" and "freedom" dont always equal the path of higher dollars.
Fascinating. And yet you have the freedom to make twice the money in the free market...and choose not too.
Yes, that is right. I love where I live, my wife has a thriving business, we are close to family, friends, etc., I have a perfect commute, I love my job and the technologies that I am working on, love my laboratory, we love our home and what we have done to it, etc. Money, while extremely important to us, is NOT everything. It does not have to be and it is not ALL the time.
Originally Posted By: Tempest
I happen to know a man that was a government engineer (space program) and he is one of the smartest people I know. He was very good at his job and eventually went to the "other side" after his retirement. So as you say, painting with a broad brush is not productive.
Government "experts" tend to give us ineffective programs like ethanol into perpetuity but the private sector does not.
Do you know why he did that??? Because the older gov't retirement system essentially allowed you to retire, collect a pension, and then go to another company and work for a salary, effectively doubling your income. It is VERY common. Do I like it? Not really, for one reason because they changed the retirement system to be a lot more like a 401k, and such things cannot be done. Have to understand the bigger picture... this is more common than you know, folks either retire and go away for good, or, VERY often, come back to industry.
Now, as for ethanol, how much of it is "experts" versus propaganda and lobbying by the corn industry?
http://www.dougsimpson.com/blog/archives/000610.html
And,
"Agricultural subsidies
ADM's receipt of federal agricultural subsidies have come under criticism. According to a 1995 report by the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, "ADM has cost the American economy billions of dollars since 1980 and has indirectly cost Americans tens of billions of dollars in higher prices and higher taxes over that same period. At least 43 percent of ADM's annual profits are from products heavily subsidized or protected by the American government. Moreover, every $1 of profits earned by ADM's corn sweetener operation costs consumers $10, and every $1 of profits earned by its ethanol operation costs taxpayers $30."[13]
Lobbying and campaign contributions
ADM's lobbying and campaign contributions have encouraged the continuation of the United States federal sugar program (of trade barriers and price supports) by Congress, costing US consumers roughly $3 billion a year.[13] ADM also lobbied to create and perpetuate federal ethanol subsidies. Some commentators have concluded that the ADM experience demonstrates the need for campaign finance reform.[13]"
Bovard, James. "Archer Daniels Midland: A Case Study In Corporate Welfare". Cato Policy Analysis No. 241. CATO Institute. September 26, 1995
How about:
"Since the 2000 election cycle, ADM has given more than $3 million in political contributions, according to the Center for Responsive Politics: $1.2 million to Democrats and $1.85 million to Republicans. These donations may have helped sustain a multitude of government subsidies to ADM, including ethanol tax credits, tariffs against foreign ethanol competitors, and federally mandated ethanol additive standards."
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=13646
So follow the money trail and the cause/effect scenario to see the basis for why ethanol is getting pushed. Not because there necessarily has to be the best science behind it when dollars are involved. But don't blame that on the folks trying to do the right thing, or blanket them as all in the same group... The free market is effected, and taxation is occurring because of the corporate messing with it in the form of political kickbacks.
But back on track, there is LESS energy in E15 than in pure gasoline, and we do not have a good source of it to secure for the whole country. Logistics are tough, it isnt sensible to me very much. Im not for it. I am for biodiesel as it enhances fuel quality amongst other things, and thus is a value added product on top of being a useful fuel with a decent energy balance.
