U.S. corn ethanol was not a good policy-Gore | Energy & Oil | Reuters
U.S. ethanol consumes about 40 pct corn cropFood and Fuel America.com: Al Gore Saved The Ethanol
...
ATHENS, Nov 22 (Reuters) - Former U.S. vice-president Al Gore said support for corn-based ethanol in the United States was "not a good policy", weeks before tax credits are up for renewal.
...
"It is not a good policy to have these massive subsidies for (U.S.) first generation ethanol," said Gore, speaking at a green energy business conference in Athens sponsored by Marfin Popular Bank.
"First generation ethanol I think was a mistake. The energy conversion ratios are at best very small.
"It's hard once such a programme is put in place to deal with the lobbies that keep it going."
He explained his own support for the original programme on his presidential ambitions.
"One of the reasons I made that mistake is that I paid particular attention to the farmers in my home state of Tennessee, and I had a certain fondness for the farmers in the state of Iowa because I was about to run for president."
...
Gore said a range of factors had contributed to that food price crisis, including drought in Australia, but said there was no doubt biofuels have an effect.
"The size, the percentage of corn particularly, which is now being (used for) first generation ethanol definitely has an impact on food prices.
"The competition with food prices is real."
[Gore] "I was also proud to stand up for the ethanol tax exemption when it was under attack in the Congress -- at one point, supplying a tie-breaking vote in the Senate to save it. The more we can make this home-grown fuel a successful, widely-used product, the better-off our farmers and our environment will be."
Posts
7 comments:
The corn thing was a political goal, the C02 is a money goal. Someone that will make a decision to support something to further his political career would make any decision to further fatten his wallet.
so, for leftie statists and eco-green t a r ds, the ends can justify the means intermittently or whenever?
Hey be happy! burning up this GM corn (GM corn fed to rats renders a significant proportion infertile in three generations)is the best thing to do it's not good for humans and no comprehensive human studies ever get published.
While running for Prez Gore said twice that production ag would be phased out of the us. Now that's just what seems to be happening as we've become a net importer of food.
Now he's sorry to support ethanol tax breaks. Why? Not because it's bad energy policy, because he knew that when he was supporting it. How about this one: He's against it because it's sucking money from carbon trading and from the newest huckster lie, that is wind power. Hmmmm.. think about that one.
People eat more than corn, and the farmers need money to buy other foods. America needs this biofuel! ..especially if it burns cleaner that what we have now.
If burning "food for fuel" is unethical, then any profession other than farming is unethical, too! Food is being overproduced in many industrialized countries around the world. Brazil produces so much sugercane, there's not enough people in the world to eat all that sugarcane if it weren't turned into ethanol there. Africa's population is starving not because there isn't enough food on the world market, but because they have no foreign currency to buy any of it.
No more subsidies for corn farmers, no more subsidies for anyone, yes. But claiming "food into fuel" is unethical, no sorry.
Corn has about 1:1.2 (ratio of energy in to grow corn):(energy out as ethanol fuel) and that includes the value of a portion of the residue sold off to fill out cattle feed.
Brazilian sugar cane ethanol is at about 7:1 ratio.
Funny!!! America does not allow the import of Brazilian Ethanol. I wonder why?
Post a Comment