WARNING FROM THE AAA

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
Corn is high priced for livestock? Mention that around a farmer and you will most likely be laughed out of the county. Corn prices are are at very low levels and have been for a while. Just heard a report the other day that cash rent farmland prices are dropping because of lower corn prices and may drop some more if corn prices don't come around.

Guess no one actually read what I posted or bothered to do any research to refute me on the food vs fuel thing. 17 lb of livestock feed is made from the average bushel of corn used for ethanol production. Roughly 2.5 gallons of ethanol produced per bushel. high grade CO2 is produced from ethanol production that is primarily used by beverage manufacturers. Corn oil from ethanol plants is being bought up by biodiesel producers as a good feedstock for production along with soybean oil and other sources. And dozens of other products folks use every day that can be traced back to ethanol production.

Farmers don't deal with ethanol plants on what gets targeted for normal uses and what gets used for ethanol production. Farmers sell on the commodities market. Where the corn goes after it leaves the farm is not up to the farmer. That farmers have a say in what corn goes to ethanol or not is a very myopic view of farm markets.
There are different types of corn, some used for human consumption, some for livestock, and some for making ethanol. I could live with a free market CHOICE of booze in my gas or not , but NOT having it rammed down my throat.
 
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
Not a lot of pumps, but further west of Illinois and Indiana, in Iowa, I have come across, and filled, with E15 frequently. I am sure it has to do with trying to get folks to buy it, but the stations I have seen that have it are guaranteeing that E15 will always be 10 cents lower per gallon than 87 E10.

I still contend that any lack of availability of non ethanol fuel has nothing to do with the Feds, corn lobby, etc but is purely the motivation of state and local governments. We in Iowa have a plethora of fuel choices all the time, with and without ethanol. Virtually every town, year round. E0 (regular and premium) E10, E15, E20, E30, and E85.
SO it's a dime cheaper...but WHAT'S the MPG penalty.
 
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
Originally Posted By: SHOZ
The US Government spent over $2B last year on corn subsides of one type or another. The EPA mandates the use of ethanol. Is it so hard to put two and two together?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2014/04/20/its-final-corn-ethanol-is-of-no-use/


Read the article and must have missed it, as I did not find one thing that said corn got any direct subsidies. Not saying it wasn't buried in there, just never saw it. Interesting article, but not sure it quite developed the point you were trying to make. Would you also dig up how much in government subsidies are paid to various aspects of the petroleum sector and give us the comparison. Not quite fair to only show one side of the equation.

As for mandates, everyone's entire life is surrounded with mandates. I am for eliminating them all. Let's see.... all those air bag recalls for bags that are all mandated. Product labeling and warnings, most to which are nonsense, in multiple languages, and only add cost to the finished product, all mandated in some way. Financial mandates by government like Dodd/Frank and other regulatory stuff that make it so small businesses have more limited access to capitol. And traditionally over 80% of jobs are created by small business. So job creation suffers. And all of these cost the consumer far and away more actual money than any supposed corn subsidies or ethanol mandates. At least with the ethanol mandate, you actually get fuel to use. One may not like using that fuel, but they are not out much of anything. There is billions of dollars that disappear into the sink hole of government each year that most folks barely give a rip about. The 2B you mention, and I will even give you as being true, is hardly a blip on the radar compared to most of the other waste, and at least, this one stays in the country.

And in the overall picture, ethanol barely is a blip on the radar. Actual ethanol subsidies were eliminated in 2011, corn prices have not reached the floor support price in well over 2 decades, so there has been no actual corn price support payments paid in that time. Sure, there has been government subsidies to improve crop land, control erosion, crop insurance programs, etc. And the argument that more land that could be used for other crops has been taken over by corn, is dwarfed by the largest crop land reduction problem ever.... urban sprawl, city expansion, housing subdivisions, and poor highway design.

Ethanol gets $2B in subsidies? That could be. Compare to the billions upon billions for petroleum energy...... and at least corn ethanol doesn't require military adventures and GI's coming home in coffins to keep it going like petroleum does...

http://priceofoil.org/fossil-fuel-subsidies/


Me thinks thine outrage is misdirected.
In case you haven't noticed we are now a net oil EXPORTER, so spare us the pretend outrage. Apparently you are unaware of the provisions of "Rural Energy for America" (what a bullbleep title) Act. Subsidies remain.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Shannow
And if the gas was cut off tomorrow, exactly WHAT security does the ethanol provide ?

Bunk argument when you can't live without the other 95%.

What have I got against ethanol ?

Problem with your type turtle, is that people who disagree with you are automatically labelled haters, ignorant, racist, all the other stuff.

I'm not against ethanol as either product or fuel.

Stupid arguments like "corn is a grass, so brewer's mash is feeding cattle grass" (not you, but it's here) are patently stupid, but refuting them gets a label.

Current studies on acetobacteria in underground tanks get hosed down, while 70s studies on carbed engines still get a run.

I've used ethanol when the energy break was there (used to be a flat 4c/l off a 90-95c/l product, now it's 3c off $1.50, so the consumer is getting hosed...which is why the ethanol industry in Oz wants a mandate.

I'm against political lobbying to get my money into some-one else' pocket. Big grain group in Oz wined and dined my state premier to get a 10% mandate even 'though their own papers said they couldn't meet the mandate and supply and demand (LOL) would make their product more expensive. He got his mandate through, and some whistleblowers brought up the influence, which he denied, until the records were brought out of the lunch meetings that he "forgot" about (forgetting a $3,000 bottle of wine had him marching)

I'm against the corruption that the lobbyists bring to the process.

I'm against the argument that it's "non food" corn, when the same patch could be growing "food corn", other "food", or simply grass raising cattle to a much better health effect for the people eating the meat, and less room for greenies to be using the land and water consumption argument against meat because the industry is grain fed (or mash fed)...and if it wasn't for the corn and ethanol lobbies and mandates it would be.

Look at biodiesel...the US standard is geared around soy oil, the Australian standard is geared around canola...not for any scientific reason, because is it was an absolute specification, you wouldn't need a particular core ingredient to make it....again, you have a soy lobby, we have canola, as GM soy hasn't taken off here.

I'd favour mixer pumps, with the two prices next to each other, the energy content on the label, and dial up your blend...that's not a hater.

I'd favour biofuels that provide a serious nett positive energy balance, and powered the farm/transport vehicles making it
And a FREE MARKET choice as to whether or not to use it.
 
Originally Posted By: HerrStig
There are different types of corn, some used for human consumption, some for livestock, and some for making ethanol. I could live with a free market CHOICE of booze in my gas or not , but NOT having it rammed down my throat.


Well, that would be true to some extent. Popcorn is not used for livestock feed (in most cases) or ethanol production. And sweet corn is pretty much a people food unless the raccoons and possums get to it before you can pick it.

But the rest of the corn? Number 2 yellow field corn. That is used for corn bread, Kelloggs corn flakes, corn oil, corn starch, sweetners, livestock and poultry feed, ethanol production and a wide laundry list of other products. It is even one of the products used to make the gluten free pasta I like. The very same corn that is used for livestock and poultry production is the very same kind of corn for ethanol production. There is no different corn for each.

Ethanol is not rammed down your throat! just like you are not told where you have to live or work. If you don't have a choice of not using ethanol where you live, then move to an area that does allow the choice. There are lots of areas of the country where one doesn't have to play in the ethanol swimming pool. Right here is ethanol central, cornbelt Iowa for one! I can select E0 regular or premium, or E10 of either of those, or E15, E20, E30, or E85. And all of that while being surrounded by 50 biofuel production plants.
 
Originally Posted By: HerrStig
In case you haven't noticed we are now a net oil EXPORTER, so spare us the pretend outrage. Apparently you are unaware of the provisions of "Rural Energy for America" (what a bullbleep title) Act. Subsidies remain.


Your right! Oil subsidies remain! Just like wind energy subsidies, solar power subsidies, etc. And those are direct subsidies, not just tax credits that reduce tax liability. And true, there are agriculture subsidies, but most of those center around the crop insurance program regarding crop losses due to drought, floods, tornados, etc. And some subsidies targeted to areas for land set aside programs to let cropland sit unused for a set period of time. Mostly for wildlife purposes. And there are subsidies to promote land improvement projects like hillside terraces and other erosion issues. All of those have no bearing on what crop is raised on that ground. It could be soybeans, wheat, oats, whatever. But there has not been any corn price support subsidies paid out since the early 90's. Corn has not hit the basement price in over 2 decades to where corn price support payments would kick in.
 
FWIW we have been using E-10 in Virginia for years and it hasn't been an issue. The Fox News article was just a stab at the gov't. I've got to the point I don't believe one word they say their credibility is so bad. They talked about phase separation but not what caused it. Simple solution is to keep your tank topped off or completely empty during storage.
 
Originally Posted By: Silverado12
FWIW we have been using E-10 in Virginia for years and it hasn't been an issue. The Fox News article was just a stab at the gov't. I've got to the point I don't believe one word they say their credibility is so bad. They talked about phase separation but not what caused it. Simple solution is to keep your tank topped off or completely empty during storage.
Yup, they are all wrong and you see the shining path.
 
Originally Posted By: turtlevette
You best get your behind out of Boston real quick before you get lynched.

You'd be much better off in a state with a confederate flag.

You're on the Soros payroll, I see, but he can't be paying much.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
Originally Posted By: HerrStig
There are different types of corn, some used for human consumption, some for livestock, and some for making ethanol. I could live with a free market CHOICE of booze in my gas or not , but NOT having it rammed down my throat.


Well, that would be true to some extent. Popcorn is not used for livestock feed (in most cases) or ethanol production. And sweet corn is pretty much a people food unless the raccoons and possums get to it before you can pick it.

But the rest of the corn? Number 2 yellow field corn. That is used for corn bread, Kelloggs corn flakes, corn oil, corn starch, sweetners, livestock and poultry feed, ethanol production and a wide laundry list of other products. It is even one of the products used to make the gluten free pasta I like. The very same corn that is used for livestock and poultry production is the very same kind of corn for ethanol production. There is no different corn for each.

Ethanol is not rammed down your throat! just like you are not told where you have to live or work. If you don't have a choice of not using ethanol where you live, then move to an area that does allow the choice. There are lots of areas of the country where one doesn't have to play in the ethanol swimming pool. Right here is ethanol central, cornbelt Iowa for one! I can select E0 regular or premium, or E10 of either of those, or E15, E20, E30, or E85. And all of that while being surrounded by 50 biofuel production plants.
Sure, millions of folks are going to relocate because that's your pathetic solution in lieu of simply providing a free choice. You are real generous with MY time and money. Typical.
 
Well, at least it is a solution for those that can't seem to live with themselves over the ethanol thing. At least until you can convince the powers that be in your state to allow non ethanol to be sold right along side ethanol blends, like we do in my neck of the woods. Seems you need to generate some support in you state for allowing free choice. We didn't even have to whimper a bit. We have had free choice since the ethanol thing came about in the late 70's. And even though we do have free choice in using ethanol blends or not, the vast majority of folks here still buy E10. Probably would work out the same where you are, so you have a tough job trying to get enough people motivated in your area to fight to change things. Good Luck. I hope you can convince your hired help at the state capitol to change things to the way you would like them. After all, it is you state agencies that mandate you but the stuff. The EPA only specifies a level of ethanol blended into gasoline, but does not say that non ethanol fuel cannot be an option. If you can't convince your state folks, then you either need to learn to live with it or move. Sorry that you don't like those options, but until things change, I don't see any other option. Except maybe go diesel and avoid gasoline.

Millions of folks don't have to relocate. Only the minority that seems to have a fit over the ethanol thing. If it was causing millions grief, as you suggest, then more options would be available. Most folks don't even give the ethanol topic a single minute of time out of their normal life. Only a small vocal minority. It would only be Hundreds that might need to move. The majority of folks aren't worried about it.

But hey, the cost of living out here in the midwest where I live is the lowest in the country! Our dollars go further. I just read a study on buying power of folks around the country. For every dollar, folks in the Northeast can only buy about .86 in value of goods. Out here in flyover country, a dollar here will by almost $1.20 worth of goods. You tell me, how much would 2.25 acres of land, with a nice three bedroom, two full bathroom 2400 sq ft ranch home full finished basement and dual car heated garage, along with a separate 60x100 shop go for in your area? Out here... about $150K. And we have non ethanol if we chose. The air and water are cleaner. Less crowding and life is not so fast paced. Life is good. And we have had 164 people die on our roads in the entire state this year so far, far lower number by several magnitudes than the majority of states in the country.
 
the midwest has also had a tendency to have weaker industry and lower employment opportunities in line with the lower cost of living, the wages are typically lower than you'd see in major coastal cities.

that being said, i will continue to live in the midwest for the rural type life which brings much peace and quiet,,,and i figure if i'm still alive when the ocean levels rise, i should be high and dry.
 
Last edited:
Well, the average wages are indeed lower in the midwest, but the cost of living is substantially lower as well. And the midwest unemployment averages are something many other areas of the country can only dream of. Not the lowest, for sure, but definitely in the running for lowest.

Yeah, and the beauty of living rural. Where my neighbor can fire off his black powder cannon occasionally, my other neighbor regularly uses Tannerite on his property for rifle targets that will blow up. He even put 10 lb of the stuff in an old RV and fired at it with his .308 rifle and blew up the entire RV! I can step out of my house, in my drawers, and shoot my .45 or similar from the deck. All of these situations without raising one eyebrow of the local authorities. And property taxes that many other folks around the country would kill their grandmother to have. And no emissions inspections on anything either! Some of the lowest premiums on auto insurance that can be had in the country. I have a pit dug on the east end of the property that I can burn all my trash with no repercussions from the government. And I don't need to get and pay for a permit to do building repairs or renovations.

And all the ethanol free gas I could ever want! And my business is diverse enough that it is not tied to the local economy only, but competes nationally. And I have contracts with some entities that are virtually recession proof. And if global warming causes the seas to rise, I am relatively safe for a long, long time as well. Best of all, DC will be under water!
 
Originally Posted By: John_Conrad
the midwest has also had a tendency to have weaker industry and lower employment opportunities in line with the lower cost of living, the wages are typically lower than you'd see in major coastal cities.

that being said, i will continue to live in the midwest for the rural type life which brings much peace and quiet,,,and i figure if i'm still alive when the ocean levels rise, i should be high and dry.


Not true in Indiana. Check the employment numbers.
 
i can acknowledge that indiana has had a recent growth in it's economy since say about what 2009 or 10? Whether that can be sustained in lieu of the current globalization and ever changing economy remains to be seen. I hope that it does, it is a good success story.

generally though, what i see in the midwest is as i mentioned when compared to coastal areas who have greater access to the world via ports and transportation routes that are not burdened by the large amount of snow days experienced in the midwest.
 
One of the great advantages of living in Iowa. Sitting between two large transportation rivers. And the economy is primarily agriculture, so the we are actually a net exporter compared to the country at large which is a net importer. And we make enough ethanol and biodiesel that we could cover our rear ends in a crisis. And we export a lot of the biofuels out of the country. And we are exporting electricity from all the wind farms in Iowa. It may not be the wealthiest part of the country, but the economy is surprisingly stable. We don't get hit with all the ups and downs as severely as many other areas do. In a total economic meltdown, we could weather it better than most of the major metro areas and heavy populations on the coasts. And we can buy a home that would normally be $300K-$500K in a major metro area, for around $125K. And property taxes are easily 1/4 of what they are in many other major population areas of the country. And my auto insurance for a 2015 Silverado 2500 is about $65 a month. I think we have it pretty good, overall, here. The only thing that messes things up is the Feds.

And one of the largest suppliers of firearms parts and accessories in America is 12 miles from my home. Brownell's.
 
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
The only thing that messes things up is the Feds.


And the weather! But we have become real good at handling the massive snowfall events and being prepared to hunker down with no electricity or heat!

Take for instance this year and other year's extended spring rains that gave difficulty in planting the crops for different regions in the midwest. If you did not get corn in, well soybean was still an option, and even though many folks were unable to plant this year, i think that number will be less than expected. Only waiting to see what the effects of the excess rain fall does to the yields.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top