Miscast "Environmentalism"

[RobBob]

I’ve noticed some of you suggesting that bio-diesel is a good idea for those that consume diesel fuel. Well, when it comes to soy-diesel or corn-ethanol, what you are buying is more a government grain-farmer welfare program than it is an environmental improvement. Turning soybeans and corn, the two largest feedstuffs consumed for food and animal feed in the US, into a competitively-priced fuel doesn’t work until you get the Federal government involved…and you know what that means.

 

Fact is, the soybean farmers in this country have used every trick in the book in order to prop prices up for their commodity, and this is one more play out of their playbook. A decade ago, the US Soybean Association was so worried about China exporting low-cost soybeans to the US that it sent agents to China to help them build their poultry and pork production into an efficient industry, and to get China’s meat consumption up. It worked (agents still live and work there today), and China consumes its own soybeans and eats a lot more meat thanks to US soybean farmers. Now the threat to the US grain farmer is Brazil, which is beginning to export high-quality soybean meal as well as soybeans by the shipload to the US.

 

Thanks to US farmers and your politicians, we will end up with new refineries that route 64-car unit trains of soybeans and corn out of the Midwest, refineries that may for appearances only have been located in other grain-producing states. In other words, facilities set up to run on raw material that is not produced locally, but is instead sourced in some cases from across the country. Meanwhile, our nation will be importing soybeans, soybean meal, and corn in order to meet its growing food. The fallout of all this? Cost to taxpayers, higher food prices, as well as possibly some local public health problems in the vicinity of these refineries. All to benefit our nation’s grain farmers.

 

The only bio-fuel projects worth funding are those that use materials we need to get rid of: human and animal shit. I’m boycotting grain-fuels because they are really pork-fuels.

 

[fshrgrl]

I would agree that large scale farmers/the agro industrial complex in the US are the largest pigs at the federal subsidy welfare trough, but somehow this seems like a small price to pay compared to the irreparable damage that would be done to ANWR if we start going in there and digging holes. And you know it's only a matter of time before our unquenchable thirst for petroleum gives the Bushies a good excuse to start opening up the National Parks to exploration, it's already being talked about. I'd rather listen to some fat farmer complain how he's not getting enough support from the guv'ment than hiking past oil derricks in the Tetons.

[hakioawa]

The government subsidizes nearly all energy. What do you think the military is for. What ever you believe about the gulf wars, the do represent a defacto subsidy to the oil industry. What about the "strategic petroleum reserve". What about WPPS. How about hydro power. All of these things are huge subsidies.

 

If you want to talk about real subsidies than you can start talking about externalities. Who is paying for the clean up of coal mines in West Virginia?

 

I agree that bio-diesel is a crock. But the subsides are no different than anything else.

 

[RobBob]

We can, and have talked about the oil industry and whether we are attempting to protect/overtake/control oil with military force in the Middle East. Not sure I would call this a "subsidy." If so, we lost much more ground in the 1970s than we will ever gain back in terms of oil price, by letting the ME nations "nationalize" their oilfields (which amounted to the largest re-distribution of wealth in human history). Before that, US and European oil companies transferred 50 years of wealth and technology to the ME in return for oil supply. Everything's relative, and I would argue that the ME had a good deal from the West before we let it, led by Qaddaffi, take over control of the oil. But that's another story.

 

hakioawa, I will go along with your environmental economics approach, and agree that we should consider all the externalities. But bucks-wise, yield-wise, politics-wise, I think the grain-fuel products are like the emperer's new clothes. Eventually, when the projects are scrutinized, the public will realize that it was taken again. I only bring it up here in order for people to investigate it on their own.

 

[AlpineK]

I burn biodiesel on a regular basis. I'm not into government subsidies of big agrobusiness, however that's a seperate issue form why I burn it. Let me give you a list

 

Regular diesel is carsinogenic, biodiesel is not

Regular diesel emits all kinds of pollutants, biodiesel doesn't (with the exception of NO)

Regular diesel adds stored carbon to the atmosphere, biodiesel only adds carbon that the soy plants soaked up(or I should say 75% less stored carbon)

 

I fail to see how biodiesel can only be produced with government subsidies. If there were no subsidies then we could buy cheap soy beans from all over (like you said in your post) and thus the price of biodiesel would be less.

 

Sorry but your logic sucks.

[Ratboy]

fshrgrl said:

And you know it's only a matter of time before our unquenchable thirst for petroleum gives the Bushies a good excuse to start opening up the National Parks to exploration, it's already being talked about.

 

And in some cases it's already being done. Do some research on oil drilling in Padre Island National Seashore in Texas. Here's an article .

[JoshK]

RobBob, your logic is based upon about 5% of the facts. If you made the same comparison against fossil fuels, you would realize that it's way more subsidized than biodesiel is. The fact remains, however, that buring biodesiel is a lot better for the planet than burning fossil fuels. I agre that it's stupid to subsidize the grain farmers to this extent, but mouthing off that buidesiel has no merits is silly.

[RobBob]

...but mouthing off that buidesiel has no merits is silly.

 

JoshK, you are the original guy that shoots from the hip and misses. I didn't say that it has NO merits. But regardless whether it burns somewhat cleaner, these facts remain:

 

-the corn and soy biofuel industry is packed with our $ that artificially reduce the price of the fuel.

 

-the crude oil refining industry, despite what you think, is not "subsidized" to lower consumer prices. Some of the largest companies in the world operate profitable businesses by purchasing crude oil at market prices, cracking that oil into products at refineries, and selling those products at market prices. The same cannot be said for the bio-fuel industry.

 

-the diesel industry is using bio-diesel as a way to offset negative pr about pollution from diesel engines.

 

-the vast majority of the articles found on the internet touting soy biodiesel are put up by organizations with a financial stake in its success.

 

My point is simple: While creating bio-diesel from by-products like human or livestock waste, or waste cooking oil, etc. makes sense, it does not intuitively make sense to subsidize a new industry into existence with tax dollars, when farmed acres in the US are decreasing and population is growing. We need to use farmland for food, not to delude ourselves that we are doing good with a costly pr gimmick.

 

 

[AlpineK]

What are you talking about Rob? We already produce way more food then we need...look at all the fat people in America.

 

[allthumbs]

speaking of fat people, look at the Samoans

what's up with those heavy D's?

[AlpineK]

trask said:

speaking of fat people, look at the Samoans

what's up with those heavy D's?

 

They get Spam and Corned Beef Hash straight from the US

[allthumbs]

'splains everythang

[RobBob]

"Did someone call for my Samoan attorney?"

[bunglehead]

Last night, as I was driving home from work, I had the very rare opportunity to directly compare bio-diesel vs. regular diesel exhaust. Directly in front of me was a VW van burning bio-diesel, and in the lane next to me was a big ass regular diesel bus. All I can say is the bio-diesel smelled awful, and didn't give me that lovely little rush one can only get from Petro diesel. Until bio exhaust can damage brain cells like the regular stuff, I vote petro.

[catbirdseat]

RobBob knows what he is talking about on this issue. The production of ethanol from corn and biodiesel from soybeans consumes more energy in its production than the energy it contains. It takes fossil fuel to run the tractor that tills the field, for the fertilizer that is used, to harvest the grain, to transport it, and finally to refine it. In the end it could never be competitive with fossil fuel were it not for the government subsidies.

[Jim]

But can't you make biodiesel from used cooking oil? Or am I thinking of something else?

[Dr_Flash_Amazing]

You're thinking of Traskolube.

[AlpineK]

catbirdseat said:

RobBob knows what he is talking about on this issue. The production of ethanol from corn and biodiesel from soybeans consumes more energy in its production than the energy it contains. It takes fossil fuel to run the tractor that tills the field, for the fertilizer that is used, to harvest the grain, to transport it, and finally to refine it. In the end it could never be competitive with fossil fuel were it not for the government subsidies.

 

Bullshit Catshit. The EPA says production of biodiesel uses 25% of the total energy of biodiesel. Before you forget, it takes quite a bit of energy to transport and crack petoleum.

 

[RobBob]

Jim's right, waste grease and oil is usable, and makes the most sense for bio-diesel refined from fat/oil feedstocks.

 

I want as much as anyone to purchase products that make environmental sense as long as they are relatively cost-competitive. But the feedstock cost alone, based on a ten-year average price for US soybeans, is $1.50 per gallon. And feedstock is only 50-70% of the cost of the end product.

 

Waste oils and animal fats/tallows are all significantly lower-cost feedstocks for biodiesel, and to my mind make much more sense since they are by-products of other processes. Biodiesel would cost less than soy-biodiesel, and be getting rid of secondary products.

 

But using soybeans to make biodiesel is like using sashimi-grade tuna to make surimi---it might make the uninformed feel good, but over time we are all paying for this.

 

[Dru]

Ok...now if you make biodeisel from rendered animal fat...can you get mad cow disease from it? after all cows get mad cow from eating high protein feed made from rendered scrapie infected sheep....etc

[AlpineK]

I don't care where it comes from. If it's cheaper that's great.

 

The US produces way more food than we need.

[RobBob]

Alpine, you're still running on the stats that we learned years ago about US food production and consumption...things are changing fast and will continue to change. Look at how many people are projected to live in the US in the next 10 and 20 years.

[AlpineK]

RobBob said:

Alpine, you're still running on the stats that we learned years ago about US food production and consumption...things are changing fast and will continue to change. Look at how many people are projected to live in the US in the next 10 and 20 years.

 

I'm running on the size of the American waist line, which is getting bigger and bigger. Maybe instead of using these soy beans to feed pigs to produce McLard burgers we should turn the stuff into fuel. Hmm... Or then again maybe we should increase the government spending on programs that pay farmers not to farm.