NATIONAL: The Extreme Folly of Corn Ethanol

I've been wanting to write on this subject for a LONG time! Ethanol is such a losing proposition in so many different ways that I don't know where to start...

This is all I have time for now, but there will be more to come. Thanks for reading.

BASIC ETHANOL STATISTICS: I'm just going to collect and throw out some basic ethanol statistics that I can refine over time.

• The US uses 40% of its national corn crop to create ethanol.
• The EPA mandates that 13,800,000,000 (that's right: 13.8 Billion) gallons of ethanol be mixed int our gasoline supply in 2013.
• Ethanol production is HEAVILY subsidized by taxpayers, and will have to be for decades (or perhaps forever) because it just does not pencil out as a fuel additive that makes economic sense on its own.

CONTRIBUTES TO WORLD HUNGER: For a variety of reasons (worldwide drought among them), hunger epidemics are sweeping the world today - primarily in Africa, the Middle East and South America including Mexico and Central America. This 3rd world hunger is made worse by the run up in the price of corn, a world food staple, by the US conversion of this food source to a gasoline additive. President Obama has stated that he believes that the US, as the wealthiest nation on the planet, has an obligation to fight world hunger. Unfortunately, the drive to convert food to gasoline (in the form of ethanol) has made that fight that much more difficult.

INCREASES FOOD STAPLE PRICES IN MEXICO: Mexico is perhaps the hardest hit by this corn-to-ethanol policy in the United States. With corn tortillas making up the bulk of diet calories to the Mexican poor, ethanol policies in the US are believed to have driven the price of corn tortillas up by a factor of 3 in Mexico. Where is the compassion for our poor, hungry neighbors to the south? When it comes to the supposed "solution" of ethanol to the problem of global warming, the policy is basically "to h*ll with the poor"- or so it would seem from where I am standing.

INCREASE GLOBAL WARMING: Scientific American magazine says in their 2009 study that "Ethanol will NOT reduce Green House Gasses". Ethanol made from corn produces about 50% more green house gasses than fossil fuels, as is stated in  this study.

ETHANOL TRANSPORT ISSUES: Unlike fossil fuel-based gasoline, ethanol cannot be transported by pipeline, and must instead be hauled our highways in trucks. That is because, unlike fossil fuel-based gasoline, ethanol absorbs water that accumulates in pipelines and is dissolved in the ehtanol. fossil fuel-based gasoline, on the other hand, does NOT mix with water (think "oil and water don't mix", or that boat fuel filters remove water by letting it settle to the bottom of the fuel filter (because water is heaver than fossil fuel-based gasoline). Also, ethanol causes pipeline corrosion issues that fossil-fuel based gasoline does not - read about it here.  

I found an article at The Economist that says it best:

Corn-based ethanol is quite simply the largest scam ever perpetrated on U.S. society. It yields AT BEST a break-even in energy, an energy-returned-on-energy-invested of zero. It also creates more emissions than it eliminates for two salient reasons seldom mentioned.
The first is that adding ethanol to gasoline yields a more volatile mixture than the base RBOB. That has required the establishment of separate manufacturing lines to produce chemicals which re-lower volatility to its original level. Secondly, ethanol is hygroscopic and then corrosive. It cannot be transported via pipeline, the most economically and environmentally efficient means of transportation. Hence, ethanol is trucked around the country by soot-emitting 18-wheelers. An entirely new distribution infrastructure has been created to mix it with commodity gasoline (RBOB) at the local wholesale level. In addition, it uses enormous volumes of water, estimated at 82 gallons per gallon of ethanol by the Argonne National Laboratory http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/energy-futurist/the-energy-water-nexus-2. That's about one trillion gallons per year!
The corn-based ethanol rules in this country have benefited no one outside of its own value chain. There's no word for it other than egregious.

PHOTOS: Just for Fun!

A few photos from a recent backpacking trip that I liked. Click to enlarge:

NATIONAL: Buy New Ford Vehicles (not Chrysler or GM)

I will not buy NEW Chrysler or GM ("Government Motors") vehicle products, because unlike Ford, they got government bailouts in their government-sponsored illegal bankruptcies.

Early in Obama's term, around 2009, Chrysler and GM went through government-assisted bankruptcies. There were 2 problems with this:
1) Secured creditors got illegally stiffed to the tune of BILLIONS of dollars, and
2) Democrat-supported constituencies (primarily unions) got paid off at the expense of those legally entitled to bankruptcy funds.

If the government let GM and Chrysler go through a legal (non-government sponsored) bankruptcy, private investors would have competed for the assets of the car companies, and started anew - this is how bankruptcy is supposed to work, or so I am told. No, I am NOT a bankruptcy expert, so please correct me if you are (and I need correcting).

Now I read this morning that the state of Indiana was hosed by our federal government to the tune of $42.5 million, when their secured credit was denied by the Obama administration, and instead went to UNsecured creditors at the United Auto Workers union.

NATIONAL: Obama Campaign Desperation - Liar! Liar! Liar!

Obama got his clock cleaned by Romney in the first debate on October 3, 2012, plunging his campaign into an abyss of desperation. Obama directed his officials and attack dogs, including the media, to bombard the Romney camp with the "Liar" label. Obama robots are attaching the word "Liar" and "Romney" everywhere they can. But its not working.

Calling someone a liar is a serious charge, which is designed to be a loaded word suggesting bad faith or total, cynical falsity. The Romney camp has ample opportunity to do the same with Obama, but has chosen not to do so [UPDATE 10/18/2012: it would now appear that Romney's pundits and supporters are now using the "Liar Card" in the situation with our dead Ambassador to Libya - is turnabout fair play?]. For instance, every time he talks, Obama says he wants to increase taxes on the "Millionaires and Billionaires", yet his tax increase proposal starts with individuals making $200,000 a year; should the Romney team be similarly calling Obama a liar? The statement clearly is a lie. What? You mean Romney's camp isn't using the Obama "liar" tactic? Why not? Um, maybe because Romney comes from a political generation that knows how to play rough, but knows the limits of going too low at the presidential level. Obama plays by "Chicago Politics" rules, and its unfortunate for the American public to be exposed to these playground level tactics.

Traditionally, in politics, there are all kinds of ways to suggest that an opponent is not telling the truth, such as this weeks Obama TV ad asking "How Can We Trust Mitt Romney?" No objection to that approach. To have top officials from the Obama campaign yelling "Romney is a liar" at every opportunity screams of desperation and a "get elected at any cost" mentaility. Sad.

A source none other than the liberal Huffington Post picked up on this Liar tactic quickly after the debate. Just try googling "Romney" and "Liar" and see how many hits you get from the upper echelons of the Obama Campaign and Obama Staff.

For a take on the conservative angle, you can read Bill Bennett defending Romney in the first debate as NOT being a liar.

PHOTO: Just for Fun!

Photo of Andrew and Tim from a recent camping trip (photo by Cat :-)

Can't be serious all the time, can we? CLICK TO ENLARGE

NATIONAL: School Reform Shifting NonPartisan

You can read everywhere about the Chicago teacher's strike. But what is striking is that big Dem. mayor Emanuel, right after the kumbaya Democrat National Convention, is going all out for reform of the sad Chicago public schools. Unions like to portray education reformers as "the right wing fringe" who are out to "privitize our schools" so they can somehow financially benefit. Ridiculous on its face, of course. Loyal Dems like Bill Gates and Eli Broad, generous promoters of school improvement, are labeled as "billionaires out to make another buck" off of the children. Can you say "Desperation Time"?

Dismal public education has forced desperate teacher's unions to label reformers as "disrespectful" and out to "privatize" their schools. But the liberal wing is beginning to see the need for partisan reform of poor performing schools, including OBJECTIVE teacher and principal evaluations, closing of weak schools, and dumping weak teachers. We hope this trend picks up steam, but who knows - I'm not holding my breath.

STATE: State Park Investigation Proves Fraud

*******************

UPDATE: 8/20/2012. Today's Tribune has a front page article updating the story of how our Calif. State Parks had millions hidden in secret funds, while trying to fool us into raising taxes to keep our State Parks open. A recent investigation involving more than 30 interviews found that:

1) Our State Parks Dept. routinely searched in June every year for ways to spend money to keep from losing it; all the while, park closures threatened, and maintenance on the 278 state parks was not done;

2) Parks Administrator Manuel Lopez illegally tapped the park funds to pay for cash buyouts for himself and dozens of other park employees (Lopez subsequently resigned or was fired) to the tune of $271,000;

3) The Parks Employees created a variety of forged documents, including those showing they had entered into contracts to spend money on computers and such, when no such agreements existed;

4) "Burning Down" budgets in June each year (i.e., spending just to get rid of money in the budget) is widespread THROUGHOUT Calif. state government departments, NOT JUST parks (hope nobody is surprised by this);

5) Parks Director Ruth Coleman resigned in July, claiming she didn't know of this Parks Slush Fund, though investigation testimony revealed that she did indeed know.

Here's what I think:

1) Gov. Brown must have known about this, yet continued on his crusade to use Calif. Park Closings to convince Californian's to vote this November to raise taxes;

2) I'm betting that Coleman and Lopez were able to resign and retain their full retirement benefits, when they should have been fired for their fraudulent role in this whole situation;
3) California voters voted for a democrat controlled legislature, a democratic governor, and spending that is out of control - well, we got what we wanted. Still want to give these buffoons more of your money through Calif. tax increases? November is coming...

Get more updates on the story in the Los Angeles Times or the Sacramento Bee.

*******************

UPDATE: 8/2/2012. Source: The Tribune, SanLuisObispo.com. It was reported that California Parks Department deliberately underreported $53.8 million in 2 accounts. State finance officials were alerted to this error fifteen (15!!!) years ago, as far back as 1997, said Jacob Roper, a spokesman for the State Controller's Office. This raises questions about basic state government account policies and procedures, or lack thereof. The $53.8 million surplus dates back at least 12 years, even though the state was threatening to shut down 70 state parks due to budget constraints. State Parks Director Ruth Coleman stepped down (I assume that means she QUIT), and her Deputy Chief, Michael Harris was let go (I assume that means FIRED). Director Coleman claims she was unaware of the secret hidden fund, thus leaving us to wonder why she quit?

To the many folks who stepped into the void with their own private money and effort to keep our beloved State Parks open, this is both a huge slap in the face, and a reason to not trust what our beloved State Government tell us. Things like this are really discouraging to folks who care about things like this. Our local SLO economy relies heavily on our state parks attracting tourists to our hotels and restaurants. SLO County has numerous state parks, though I could not put my finger on the number.

********************

UPDATE 7/30/2012: Who knows what to believe. Apparently, it is not clear whether the $54,000,000 even exists or not [Update 8/2/2012 - apparently the money DOES exist]. Due to lax accounting standards, the $54 mil may just be accounting errors. It has been show repeatedly that the government, in all its forms and at all its levels, cannot pass a standard accounting audit. They are not subject to audits, nor the discipline and scrutiny that goes with it. Sigh. California has a few billion in these "slush" funds, but doesn't really know how much. In the upcoming weeks, they hope to account for some of this money and then move on once it is out of the news. A few billion here, a few billion there, and pretty soon you're talking about a lot of money.

********************

ORIGINAL POST July 24, 2012: Again, another area where I am loath to dive in, but I must. From the beginning, Calif. Gov. Brown's threat to close 70 state parks that cost the state $22,000,000 per year unless we vote to increase taxes stunk up our state. Knowing that these 70 state parks generate far more than $22 mil in local and state tax revenues, I've been smelling a rat with this one for a long time. I will not be manipulated into voting for a tax increase - I hope you won't, either.

Then comes the lovely headline today on July 24, 2012 that the State Park Fund had $54,000,000 in unused but SECRET funds at their disposal. In the previous year, non-profit groups in Calif. have been scrambling to build organizations and donations to take over these 70 parks so they don't close. Heads have already rolled, with longtime State Park Director Ruth Coleman resigning, and Chief Deputy Michael Harris resigning. Though my view has been one of tricking the state voters into raising taxes, Nick Franco, superintendant of the San Luis Obispo Coast District of State Parks somehow sees it as an effort to energize non-profits into accepting the idea of privatizing the parks. Given our state liberal bent, privatizing ANYTHING, much less a state park, would seem to be the furthest from our state legislators minds. I will keep my eyes and ears open for ANY evidence that what Mr. Franco suspects holds any water. See the July 24, 2012 Tribune Article "Local Parks Supporters Feel Betrayed by Money Scandal". Silicon Valley Mercury News also had this to say about the issue.

There is some noise about the Sacramento Bee (who broke the story) has gotten it wrong, and that the $54,000,000, while State Park funds, cannot be used to keep them open. If that's so, then why have heads rolled?