"Malcom \"Mal\" Reynolds" wrote in news:atlas-bugged- snipped-for-privacy@news.solani.org:
So you think that Florida is capable of producing sugar cane on the scale required to supply the motor vehicle fuel needs of the U.S., or even a significant fraction thereof?
History repeats. A couple generations ago, we used to call MTBE gasoline "ethyl".
Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus
formatting link
.
Corn based ethanol is a disaster. We are burning food.
If it becomes cost efficient to get ethanol from cellulose, that's another story. But we ain't there yet. The only positive thing about ethanol in gasoline is that it is not as bad as the alternative: MTBE.
So, tell me. When was the last time I watched Fox news?
Since you're telling me about myself, be specific.
Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus
formatting link
.
You watch FOX "news", and know nothing about the real world. It is well documented the Fox viewers are wrong more than people that don't watch any news.
Except they are not REWASONABLE for the USA or Canada. Now, if the USA spent 1/4 of what they are spending on wars in the middle east on research to convert cellulose to ethanol, there are HUNDREDS of reasonable feedstocks - most of which would be energy positive, which would have little or no effect on food-grain prices. (or sugar prices, as far as that goes)
Since you arrogant Canadians aren't funding any wars, and your economy is so much more robust than ours, and you're all far more intelligent than we are anyway, why don't y'all do it?
It has got relatively little to do with wars and much more to do with Congresscritters not wanting to cross the grain farmers and those ethanol plants already in place.
No. "Ethyl" is short for tetraethyl lead, an additive to used to increase the octane of gasoline. MTBE is an acronym for methyl tertiary butyl ether, an additive used make gasoline burn cleaner.
Ethanol is the other additive allowed for cleaner burning. It has the side effect of increasing octane slightly, 2-3 point at the 10% level.
I'll bet you're right. I'll also bet you they can't tell which clause in the Constitution makes the debt, the $6 trillion increase, or the fix for it the president's responsibility. -- Doug
Do the Canadians have "Affirmative Action" to gum up the works? I know the British have a version of it know as "Positive Discrimination" which I think is a more correct descriptive name for it because such policies positively discriminate against the competent. O_o
My Canadian cousins get screwed over by their government too in many of the same ways so I have no quarrel with my Northern neighbors since what happen here and there affects everyone in The Americas. ^_^
Yup - an english speaking white heterosexual male doesn't even need to bother applying for a job in the civil service - he is definitely in the minority.
Zing! It's the same clause that makes him responsible for the price of a gallon of gasoline.
I am always *negatively* impressed by the binary thinking concerning restoring tax rates. "If it doesn't completely solve the problem, it's no good!"
It took ten years of deep tax cuts and ever-increasing corporate tax avoidance and ten years of expensive wars to get us into the hole. The sooner we get that tax revenue stream back on line, the sooner the deficit disappears.
We fought two wars for longer than WWII and somehow expected there wouldn't be sacrifices. Unlike WWII, we fought the AfRaq wars on credit, and now we're going to have to pay for our mostly failed attempts at "nation building." We didn't escape the sacrifices that long wars require, we merely postponed them. Time to pay the piper.
If these were are only problems, I would happy. But we haven't even begun to address the unfunded liablity of SS, MCare, MCaid. That's another $121.6 trillion. Combine the federal budget deficit with the unfunded liabilities for current entitlement programs (excluding Affordable Care Act because those liabilities are still obscured) and it comes to a mindboggling $1.2 million per taxpayer.
I'll let the post from CRNG address that issue, but there's no reason sugar cane couldn't be expanded to other areas and I'll bet it would grow nicely in parts of Mexico...and we do have the ability to use Mexican ethanol
Then again, there is the sugar beet, sunchoke and hemp for ethanol, all of which I believe are also energy positive
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.