sounds kind of biased to me.
Quote:
|
The Corn Belt has lost about 70 percent of its wetlands. In some areas, such as Nebraska, corn has to be irrigated by pumps that suck water from the ground faster than it percolates back in. Moreover, the pumps are powered by natural gas, the frenzied production of which is creating horrendous problems for fish, wildlife, and livestock
|
being from rurual nebraska, I can tell you right now that corn is not why we have lost our wetlands. We're in a freaking drought and have been for the past 5 or so years! It's rained probably three times as much this summer than it has any of these past summers already. But hey, if it helps the argument, why not omit it.
Quote:
|
Without even factoring in the fuel that's required to ship ethanol to blending sites, Pimentel found that it takes about 29 percent more energy to produce ethanol than you get from burning it.
|
yeah, but I bet he's one of the retards that factors the sun into the equation. That makes just a tid bit of difference...
Quote:
|
Then, figuring in state and federal subsidies, Pimentel found that ethanol costs $2.24 a gallon to produce, compared with 63 cents for gasoline. Other costs of allocating corn to ethanol production, reports Pimentel, include higher food prices, because about 70 percent of the corn grown in the United States is fed to cattle. "Increasing the cost of food and diverting human food resources to the costly, inefficient production of ethanol fuel raise major ethical questions," Pimentel writes. "These occur at a time when more than half of the world's population is malnourished. The ethical priority for corn and other food crops should be for food and feed. Abusing our precious croplands to grow corn for an energy-inefficient process that yields low-grade automobile fuel amounts to unsustainable, subsidized food burning."
|
there is stuff left in corn after it has been used to produce ethanol and that is still used as feed. He's making it sound like we're completely redirecting the corn to ethanol instead of cattle. Also, I really wouldn't be surprised if that $2.24 per gallon didn't include the selling of the used corn back to farmers for feed (I'm too lazy to look it up).
Quote:
|
The question was: Who would spend 10 cents to 20 cents more per gallon for gasoline that reduces mileage, degrades your car, destroys fish and wildlife, increases air pollution, and makes the United States more dependent on foreign oil?
|
I didn't read the whole thing, but I didn't see where he talked about how ethanol makes the US more dependent on foreign oil. If anyone else finds it, please direct me.