Author Topic: World starves as Americans burn food to stay on the road (Read 4596 times)

CG6468 · « **on:** March 21, 2011, 09:44:43 AM »

The madness continues...........

Quote

World starves as Americans burn food to stay on the road

SPECTATORS at February's Daytona 500 in Florida were handed green flags to wave in celebration of the news that the race's stock cars now use gasoline with 15 per cent corn-based ethanol. It was the start of a season-long television marketing campaign to sell the merits of biofuel to Americans.

On the surface, the "greening of NASCAR" is merely a transparent (and, one suspects, ill-fated) exercise in "greenwashing" for the sport. But the partnership between a beloved American pastime and the biofuel lobby is also the latest attempt to sway public opinion in favour of a truly irresponsible policy.

The US spends about $6 billion a year on federal support for ethanol production through tax credits, tariffs, and other programs. Thanks to this financial assistance, one-sixth of the world's corn supply is burned in American cars; enough corn to feed 350 million people for an entire year.

"Green" Fuels for NASCAR

JohnnyReb · « **Reply #1 on:** March 21, 2011, 09:58:53 AM »

Yeah, but the DUmmies feel good about it so it's worth it...right?

FreeBorn · « **Reply #2 on:** March 21, 2011, 11:19:11 AM »

"The greening of NASCAR" ???

Who let the freaks in?

I'd rather see them go back to their roots and return to running their cars on corn liquor like the old days.

whiffleball · « **Reply #3 on:** March 21, 2011, 11:31:33 AM »

I can't describe how sick I am of the Blame America First shit that has taken hold. Since Obama has taken the WH it's only gotten worse.

JohnnyReb · « **Reply #4 on:** March 21, 2011, 11:34:29 AM »

How much of the grain crop in this country goes into booze?

Splashdown · « **Reply #5 on:** March 21, 2011, 12:44:27 PM »

Quote from: JohnnyReb on March 21, 2011, 11:34:29 AM

How much of the grain crop in this country goes into booze?

On days like today, not nearly enough!

MrsSmith · « **Reply #6 on:** March 21, 2011, 05:13:45 PM »

http://www.nass.usda.gov/Charts_and_Maps/Field_Crops/cornprod.asp

Corn production in the US has risen from a low in 2002 of 9 billion bushels to a high in the last 2 years of about 12.5 billion bushels. This largely negates the complaint of using so much.

Ethanol is not made from corn that would feed humans...

http://www.ethanolmarket.com/PressReleaseRFA100909

Quote

Ethanol production does not reduce the amount of food available for human consumption. Ethanol is produced from field corn which is primarily fed to livestock and is undigestible by humans in its raw form. The ethanol production process produces not only fuel but valuable livestock feed products.

Every 56-pound bushel of corn used in the dry mill ethanol process yields 18 pounds of distillers grains, a good source of energy and protein for livestock and poultry. Similarly, a bushel of corn in the wet mill ethanol process creates 13.5 pounds of corn gluten feed and 2.6 pounds of high-protein corn gluten meal, as well as corn oil used in food processing.

Importantly, ethanol production utilizes only the starch portion of the corn kernel, which is abundant and of low value. While the starch is converted to ethanol, the protein, vitamins, minerals and fiber are sold as high-value livestock feed (distillers grains). Protein, which is left intact by the ethanol process, is a highly valued product in world food and feed markets. One-third of every bushel of grain that enters the ethanol process is enhanced and returned to the animal feed market, most often in the form of distillers grains, corn gluten feed and corn gluten meal.

Ethanol does not use up the feed portion of the corn.

Quote

The overwhelming majority of U.S. corn, including exported corn, feeds livestockâ€”not humans. There is a popular misconception that corn is exported from the U.S. to feed those in malnourished countries, and thus ethanol use will diminish exports to these countries. The truth is the majority of corn exports are used to feed livestock in developed countries. Importantly, the U.S. ethanol industry is helping to satisfy foreign demand for high-protein, high-energy feedstuffs by exporting more than 1 million metric tons of distillers grains to countries around the world in 2005.

Not that facts will change the mind of any liberal.

turbocup · « **Reply #7 on:** March 21, 2011, 06:47:29 PM »

As you can see I'm a new guy on the block here. I stumbled on to this forum after doing some searching on reaction to the Australian article. I personally feel ethanol in our gasoline is a BAD idea even if it's not coming from "human" food corn. It can attact water causing corrosion of engine parts. Unlike gasoline it can't be transported through pipelines so it needs to be trucked and/or transported by rail...burning fossil fuels in the process. How much fossil fuel is consumed in the process of growing corn for ethanol? I really don't see any advantages to it. It's much better as a beverage than a fuel! I found this recent post on YAHOO:

Ethanol is wrong on so many
points. One what it does to animal feed cost. Before ethanol- I was paying 200.00
a ton for premium Horse feed. Today I am paying just shy of $500.00 dollars a ton,

Cattle feed the same. Hog the same. Poultry the same.

Ethanol offers no saving in fuel price as it was supposed to.
Ethanol is death to 2 cycle motors.
Ethanol is death to High compression engines.

I have a fleet of over 500 Police Vehicles in my department. Ethanol fuel
is detrimental to my engines by causing a caustic ring of salt around seals
and gaskets.

Worse is your situation dealing with food for hungry people.
More than 1/3 of the corn crop US will go to ethanol. Not leaving one
hell of lot for anything other.

Thanks for showing interest in the truth about ethanol
Source(s):
A County Sheriff, and Equine trainer (part time)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ok, that's one person's opinion but I agree 100% with him. What we need to be doing is developing our own petroleum resources which the government will not let us do and taking advantage of our vast natural gas resources. Natural gas makes a much better motor fuel (in vehicles designed for it) than corrosive ethanol.

BTW: This looks like a great forum and I'll be checking back!

-Chuck

MrsSmith · « **Reply #8 on:** March 22, 2011, 05:58:53 AM »

I agree that ethanol is a bad idea. I'd love to have a CNG car for the cleanliness of the fuel and long life of the engine.

But ethanol is completely renewable, exactly as the greenies want. And it does NOTHING to decrease the human food supply, since the corn used cannot be eaten by humans AND still produces high protein livestock feed. It's a flat out lie that it decreases human food, and I hate liars. There are perfectly good, truthful reasons to hate ethanol in our fuel.

Thor · « **Reply #9 on:** March 22, 2011, 07:10:53 AM »

Actually, ethanol DOES decrease the food supplies because the farmers are planting MORE corn for ethanol and LESS foodstuff corn. I witnessed this when I was up in MN and the ethanol plants started surfacing and govt props started increasing.

Rebel · « **Reply #10 on:** March 22, 2011, 07:35:58 AM »

Are we still paying people not to grow crops?

catsmtrods · « **Reply #11 on:** March 22, 2011, 05:42:32 PM »

Ethenol is shit! It screws up everything is comes in contact with including the land and ground water where its grown. Yes to much agriculture is not good. Ask the Germans.

TexasCop · « **Reply #12 on:** March 22, 2011, 05:43:59 PM »

I want to turn the entire NASCAR world upside down by installing a right turn signal in one of the cars that never quits blinking.

thundley4 · « **Reply #13 on:** March 22, 2011, 05:53:56 PM »

Quote from: TexasCop on March 22, 2011, 05:43:59 PM

I want to turn the entire NASCAR world upside down by installing a right turn signal in one of the cars that never quits blinking.

TVDOC · « **Reply #14 on:** March 22, 2011, 06:03:53 PM »

Quote from: MrsSmith on March 22, 2011, 05:58:53 AM

I agree that ethanol is a bad idea. I'd love to have a CNG car for the cleanliness of the fuel and long life of the engine.

But ethanol is completely renewable, exactly as the greenies want. And it does NOTHING to decrease the human food supply, since the corn used cannot be eaten by humans AND still produces high protein livestock feed. It's a flat out lie that it decreases human food, and I hate liars. There are perfectly good, truthful reasons to hate ethanol in our fuel.

I think that Thor hit the nail on the head.......land devoted to grain for ethanol is removed from production of food products. I'd also have a bit of a quibble with your rationale that field corn is unsuitable for anything other than stock feed, there is a HUGE industry built around cornstarch and meal which IS manufactured from field corn. Most of the production from our area ends up being purchased by companies like National Starch, Pillsbury, and General Mills. Many local farmers have end-user contracts with them.

doc

dutch508 · « **Reply #15 on:** March 22, 2011, 06:14:26 PM »

Quote from: TVDOC on March 22, 2011, 06:03:53 PM

I think that Thor hit the nail on the head.......land devoted to grain for ethanol is removed from production of food products. I'd also have a bit of a quibble with your rationale that field corn is unsuitable for anything other than stock feed, there is a HUGE industry built around cornstarch and meal which IS manufactured from field corn. Most of the production from our area ends up being purchased by companies like National Starch, Pillsbury, and General Mills. Many local farmers have end-user contracts with them.

doc

Moonshine.

Just saying.

MrsSmith · « **Reply #16 on:** March 22, 2011, 09:04:29 PM »

Quote from: Thor on March 22, 2011, 07:10:53 AM

Actually, ethanol DOES decrease the food supplies because the farmers are planting MORE corn for ethanol and LESS foodstuff corn. I witnessed this when I was up in MN and the ethanol plants started surfacing and govt props started increasing.

This could be, but when corn production has gone from 9 billion bushels to 12.5 billion bushels, it's hard to see how we could be doing much actual damage to food corn supplies. Certainly not to the extent claimed...

Thor · « **Reply #17 on:** March 22, 2011, 09:15:35 PM »

Quote from: MrsSmith on March 22, 2011, 09:04:29 PM

This could be, but when corn production has gone from 9 billion bushels to 12.5 billion bushels, it's hard to see how we could be doing much actual damage to food corn supplies. Certainly not to the extent claimed...

Because there's a difference between corn that people eat and corn used for ethanol. When ethanol started becoming the "rage", I was still in MN. Farmers there were contemplating turning away from growing potatoes to starting to grow field corn because there was more money in it due to the government subsidies of ethanol. Certainly corn production is up, but it's not the type of corn people eat.

TVDOC · « **Reply #18 on:** March 22, 2011, 09:27:42 PM »

Quote from: MrsSmith on March 22, 2011, 09:04:29 PM

This could be, but when corn production has gone from 9 billion bushels to 12.5 billion bushels, it's hard to see how we could be doing much actual damage to food corn supplies. Certainly not to the extent claimed...

The question that I would ask about the increase in production of corn to 12.5 billion bushels is: 1) There is a finite amount of tillable land in the US......what crops were grown on that land that were replaced by corn for ethanol, and 2) You cannot grow corn on the same field repeatedly year after year......crops have to be rotated, or the land is depleted. I would therefore question whether that 12.5 billion bushel number is a sustainable level, or just a fluke caused by high corn prices.

Around here, (at least on our 880 acres), corn is alternated with soybeans every year, and an occasional field is used for winter wheat after the corn is harvested (if the corn is ready early enough in the fall, so that the field can be prepped and replanted)..

doc

Thor · « **Reply #19 on:** March 22, 2011, 09:37:32 PM »

Quote from: TVDOC on March 22, 2011, 09:27:42 PM

The question that I would ask about the increase in production of corn to 12.5 billion bushels is: 1) There is a finite amount of tillable land in the US......what crops were grown on that land that were replaced by corn for ethanol, and 2) You cannot grow corn on the same field repeatedly year after year......crops have to be rotated, or the land is depleted. I would therefore question whether that 12.5 billion bushel number is a sustainable level, or just a fluke caused by high corn prices.

Around here, (at least on our 880 acres), corn is alternated with soybeans every year, and an occasional field is used for winter wheat after the corn is harvested (if the corn is ready early enough in the fall, so that the field can be prepped and replanted)..

doc

In theory, I would agree with you DOC, however, I've witnessed corn fields being used as corn fields for several years. Most notably when I lived in Becker and hunted in Granite falls. I very rarely saw any crop rotation.

thundley4 · « **Reply #20 on:** March 22, 2011, 09:42:24 PM »

Quote from: Thor on March 22, 2011, 09:37:32 PM

In theory, I would agree with you DOC, however, I've witnessed corn fields being used as corn fields for several years. Most notably when I lived in Becker and hunted in Granite falls. I very rarely saw any crop rotation.

I think the new fertilizers seemed to have done away with crop rotation. There have been corn in several fields here in town that are always corn. Yes, I live in a hick town with corn fields in the city limits.

MrsSmith · « **Reply #21 on:** March 22, 2011, 09:43:35 PM »

Quote

Friday, November 5, 2010
Corn in the USA
Heather Cox Richardson

http://histsociety.blogspot.com/2010/11/corn-and-united-states.html

...

Cheap corn has also changed the way we eat. It finds its way into most of the foods in American supermarkets, as high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) into soda and processed foods, of course, but also into less obvious places like beef, since corn was so cheap cattle growers began to use it to feed animals that had always fattened on grass. The raft of organizations concerned about Americaâ€™s obesity epidemic have pointed to the ubiquity of cheap corn as a key ingredient in our increasing health problems.

It has also most likely changed recent demographics. Researchers speculate that heavily subsidized US corn has combined with NAFTA to disrupt rural Mexico, where small farmers canâ€™t compete with cheap US corn. They have left rural regions to move to cities in Mexico, and while no research has been conducted on cross-border migration, it seems likely that displaced farmers are making their way to US farm operations to find work.
...

Interesting take on the issue...

I have been searching for information on corn production, comparisons with other crop production, etc. Have found almost nothing, so far, and I have other things I need to do tonight, so won't search any more now. However, I ran across numerous mentions that, aside from wheat, 80% of US grain production was for animal feed. Could the ethanol push have decreased human corn? Yes, of course. But if we historically aimed 80% of our corn at animal use, and have increased production dramatically over the last several years, it's really unlikely that ethanol has had any huge effect on corn for humans. In fact, if people like Ben Nelson of Nebraska are correct, it's reduced fuel prices somewhat, so possibly lower the costs of producing and transporting human food. And since ethanol production does not reduce the amount of corn used for animal feed, the increase in production has probably kept meat prices lower than they would have been otherwise.

TVDOC · « **Reply #22 on:** March 22, 2011, 09:47:01 PM »

Quote from: Thor on March 22, 2011, 09:37:32 PM

In theory, I would agree with you DOC, however, I've witnessed corn fields being used as corn fields for several years. Most notably when I lived in Becker and hunted in Granite falls. I very rarely saw any crop rotation.

five years of that, and the field will be only good for pasture for at least another five.......the yield drops every year past two, by about 20%, you just can't replace everything growing corn consumes with fertilizer........there are some crops (like soybeans, a legume), that can be planted longer, but eventually the nitrogen buildup will turn the soil acidic, and you are left with pasture again.

doc

TVDOC · « **Reply #23 on:** March 22, 2011, 09:56:25 PM »

Quote from: MrsSmith on March 22, 2011, 09:43:35 PM

Interesting take on the issue...

I have been searching for information on corn production, comparisons with other crop production, etc. Have found almost nothing, so far, and I have other things I need to do tonight, so won't search any more now. However, I ran across numerous mentions that, aside from wheat, 80% of US grain production was for animal feed. Could the ethanol push have decreased human corn? Yes, of course. But if we historically aimed 80% of our corn at animal use, and have increased production dramatically over the last several years, it's really unlikely that ethanol has had any huge effect on corn for humans. In fact, if people like Ben Nelson of Nebraska are correct, it's reduced fuel prices somewhat, so possibly lower the costs of producing and transporting human food. And since ethanol production does not reduce the amount of corn used for animal feed, the increase in production has probably kept meat prices lower than they would have been otherwise.

First I'd state that I wouldn't believe much that Ben Nelsen has to say about fuel efficiency and ethanol.....if anything it increases costs by reducing efficiency, and BTW.....corn ain't cheap right now......today's close on fall futures was $7.16 per bushel.

The entire concept of using grain for a petroleum substitute is STUPID.....and unsustainable. It won't work in the long term. Artificially increasing the cost of a commodity through alternative uses will increase costs somewhere else at least equally.....the "law of unintended consequences".

doc

CG6468 · « **Reply #24 on:** March 23, 2011, 12:03:28 PM »

Corn for biofuel?

Quote

Biofuel policy is causing starvation, says NestlÃ© boss

By Stephen Foley in New York

Wednesday, 23 March 2011

Soaring food inflation is the result of "immoral" policies in the US which divert crops for use in the production of biofuels instead of food, according to the chairman of one of the world's largest food companies.

Peter Brabeck-Letmathe, the chairman of NestlÃ©, lashed out at the Obama administration for promoting the use of ethanol made from corn, at the expense of hundreds of millions of people struggling to afford everyday basics made from the crop.

Mr Brabeck-Letmathe weighed in to the increasingly acrimonious debate over food price inflation to condemn politicians around the world who seem determined to blame financial speculators instead of tackling underlying imbalances in supply and demand. And he reserved especially pointed remarks for US agriculture secretary Tom Vilsack, who he said was making "absolutely flabbergasting" claims for the country's ability to cope with rising domestic and global demand for corn.

Source

News:

Author Topic: World starves as Americans burn food to stay on the road (Read 4596 times)