Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-06-2011, 08:26 AM
 
29,407 posts, read 22,000,960 times
Reputation: 5455

Advertisements

Same as with ethanol it can't survive. It's too expensive unless of course somebody steps in and gives money that isn't theirs to the biofuel companies. I wonder who would be in such a position???

"One of the biggest hurdles is the cost of the feedstocks. Farmers will demand to be paid several times as much as the biorefineries can afford to pay them, the study found. A biofuel producer, for example could afford to pay only about $25 a ton for corn stover, the cobs, leaves and stalks left over after the grain is harvested. But farmers would need to be paid $92 a ton to cover the costs of harvesting, storing the shipping the stover. Perennial grasses would be even more expensive."

And our revered idiot in charge of the dept of Ag chimes in with his usual nonsense..........

"Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack slammed the study as based on old data. “I think it’s unfortunate that reports that are based in my view on somewhat outdated information are basically suggesting we should give up the ghost,” he told reporters. He did not provide examples of data in the study that he considered outdated."

Translation.........studies shouldn't be based on facts but on what we say are the facts. Kinda like that whole global warming scam these loons live by.

Idiots.

Biofuels costly, impacts questionable, study says | Des Moines Register Staff Blogs
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-06-2011, 08:46 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,479 posts, read 59,771,962 times
Reputation: 24863
What biofuels are we talking about? Sounds like corporate Ag is trying to get even more money for a waste product then they could get for corn. Not surprising.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2011, 08:50 AM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,813,019 times
Reputation: 12341
Bio-fuel is more than ethanol. If Americans can't do it, they should look at the world elsewhere, and more so in the near future. There are entire communities (remote) that operate entirely on bio-fuel, and zero oil.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2011, 08:54 AM
 
29,407 posts, read 22,000,960 times
Reputation: 5455
I guess you should email your conclusions to the ones who did that study as it appears you know much more than they do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2011, 08:56 AM
 
5,938 posts, read 4,697,978 times
Reputation: 4631
Tax the hell out of oil. Then ethanol/biofuels will start to become competitive. Take the taxes and sink it into further improving alternative energies. We'll also save money on road fixes/improvements since people will drive less.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2011, 08:57 AM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,813,019 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by KUchief25 View Post
I guess you should email your conclusions to the ones who did that study as it appears you know much more than they do.
I might have a chance to visit such remote rural communities in India. And I just may have photographs and first hand experiences to share next month.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2011, 08:58 AM
 
29,407 posts, read 22,000,960 times
Reputation: 5455
That makes sense only to an oil hater. Tax it until it's so expensive the "chosen" fuel is competitive. How stupid is that?? Well very.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2011, 08:59 AM
 
29,407 posts, read 22,000,960 times
Reputation: 5455
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
I might have a chance to visit such remote rural communities in India. And I just may have photographs and first hand experiences to share next month.
Good for you. I don't care what remote communities in India do. This is the United States. Perhaps you should stay there and start up a bio fuel company if it's such a great seller in India??
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2011, 09:03 AM
 
Location: Out in the Badlands
10,420 posts, read 10,826,300 times
Reputation: 7801
Quote:
Originally Posted by KUchief25 View Post
Same as with ethanol it can't survive. It's too expensive unless of course somebody steps in and gives money that isn't theirs to the biofuel companies. I wonder who would be in such a position???

"One of the biggest hurdles is the cost of the feedstocks. Farmers will demand to be paid several times as much as the biorefineries can afford to pay them, the study found. A biofuel producer, for example could afford to pay only about $25 a ton for corn stover, the cobs, leaves and stalks left over after the grain is harvested. But farmers would need to be paid $92 a ton to cover the costs of harvesting, storing the shipping the stover. Perennial grasses would be even more expensive."

And our revered idiot in charge of the dept of Ag chimes in with his usual nonsense..........

"Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack slammed the study as based on old data. “I think it’s unfortunate that reports that are based in my view on somewhat outdated information are basically suggesting we should give up the ghost,” he told reporters. He did not provide examples of data in the study that he considered outdated."

Translation.........studies shouldn't be based on facts but on what we say are the facts. Kinda like that whole global warming scam these loons live by.

Idiots.

Biofuels costly, impacts questionable, study says | Des Moines Register Staff Blogs
Economic realities are incongruous with governmental "logic" if there is any there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2011, 09:06 AM
 
19,226 posts, read 15,318,165 times
Reputation: 2337
Quote:
Originally Posted by KUchief25 View Post
That makes sense only to an oil hater. Tax it until it's so expensive the "chosen" fuel is competitive. How stupid is that?? Well very.

Wolfgang and friend: "Very interesting ... but stupid" - YouTube
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:11 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top