Missouri Mandates Ethanol in Gasoline (from AP reporter David Lieb)


“A law taking effect Tuesday makes Missouri just the third state – behind Minnesota and Hawaii – to implement a wide-ranging ethanol mandate.” This article by AP reporter David Lieb reports on new Missouri legislation that mandates the use of ethanol-gasoline mixtures. E10, or 10% ethanol, has already become common on Missouri. The article cites the low cost of ethanol relative to gasoline as the economic driving force, but I take exception to this point! As documented extensively on my blog, tax subsidies fund ethanol and, unless obtained from biomass (which it isn’t), it not only has terrible consequences for the environment but is as bad or worse for air pollution as gasoline. Read more at this site and comment on your thoughts about the socialism practiced by Republicans to help Archer Daniels Midland and other major corn manufacturers even though corn ethanol is bad for the environment.

read more | digg story

Technorati Tags:, , , , , , , , , , ,
Generated By Technorati Tag Generator

Advertisements

  1. Thanks for stopping by my blog “Common Sense Agriculture, Conservation and Energy” located at http://agriconenergy.blogspot.com. I have been posting regularly about the negative side of ethanol to both agriculture and the environment almost from the beginning of my blog. In fact, the issue is what decided the title to the blog. Even if we switch to a cellulosic basis for ethanol production, the impact will still be negative. “Growing” energy is inefficient. Period. We must look to “capture” the energy that is already surrounding us — wind, sun, geo-thermal, nuclear. Plants are converting energy into a different form that we then exploit. Lets utilize their source of energy.

  2. Thanks Poet! I will be sure to read through your site and recommend that others do the same.

    You make a lot of good points in you response.

    You may have found, like I did, that many people have become confused between “freeing ourselves from foreign oil” and “finding environmentally friendly, less polluting fuels”. I don’t see these as being necessarily compatible or incompatible goals- it all depends on the choices made. However, many people seem to think that one implies the other, regardless of the details.

    Thanks for stopping by and for your thoughtful comments.

    Jim

  3. Jim,

    I’ve added your site to my blogroll. I suspect many of our readers have common interests. E-mail me sometime.

    Panhandle Poet

  4. StockPromoter07

    It’s good to hear BP & GM talk about alternative fuels, but 50 years to implement is too long.

    http://money.cnn.com/2008/03/05/news/companies/bigoil_hydrogen/index.htm

    Perhaps this link will spark more attention:

    http://www.chevrolet.com/electriccar/

    It is GM’s electric concept car the Chevy Volt. If more people begin to demand alternative fuel cars, we should be able to speed the rate at which the technology is developed.

    We have started an Investor Forum where Investors can meet and discuss topics like this:

    http://www.thesubway.com/small-cap-forum/

  5. Hi All,

    Plant absorbs less than 1% of the energy from the Sun shine. Solar cells can easily absorb 16% of Sun shine. That is why “growing” energy is not a good idea.

    I do have a question for you guys. What do you think about growing algae and seaweed for energy? I was told that it is much more efficient and the only input is dirty water.

  6. Algae are certainly efficient at converting sunlight into chemical energy by photosynthesis. I’m not sure of the details about seaweed but it may be similar.

    The “dirty water” issue is somewhat relative. The water has to have mineral nutrients and nothing toxic to the algae.

    Ultimately, what we get from algae or seaweed is biomass, though some bioengineering might be possible to make biodiesel in the organisms. So, we are back to how efficiently we can convert biomass into useful energy sources. I am now convinced that liquid fuels are not good enough. However, there is an article on biomass conversion that generates hydrogen, which burns to make water (no CO2), and which can be used to make electricity. This approach has much promise. If my html didn’t work for the link, see http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977155102

    Algae and seaweed aren’t the point of the article, but there may be some overlap. I’ll see if I can get author Sam Carana to comment.

  7. Some algae have very high content of fat.

    By “dirty” water, I mean the waste water from the city, animal farm and etc.

    There is a person promoting his Seaweed on Treehugger. Here is what he said.

    Over the last 6 yrs, I’ve grown 20 meteric tons/yr on a relative small footprint of a aquaculture tank farm (35′ x 120′) on the shoreline. …

    Seaweed is the very best antidote for bioethanol. It uses no vital freshwater, no vital croplands and can absorb carbon just like the other microalgae. In fact, oil did not come from dinosaurs like “they” want to make you believe but came from algae and it was algae that “supposedly” created the atmosphere before the industrial revolution; before “they” started screwing everything up!

    the international community agreed that algae was the best “application” to use to combat the rising carbon/greenhouse gases. In fact; diatoms (another microalgae that I have had success with)are the first species to form when algal blooms occur and are able to transfix 40% of the available carbon also!

    The same goes for seaweed. It too can sequester carbon amongst absorbing highly eutrophic waters. In fact, my research has been based upon such a senario, where I have proven that seaweed has the ability to clean “dirty” (eutrophic) water by “stripping” the nutrients and absorbing the CO2 in the water; thereby producing highly oxygenated and clean water that can only help the health of the marine ecosystem!

    Another great thing is that one does NOT need an cellulostic digester for seaweed, just a anaerobic digester will do and w/ large amounts of polysaccarides found in this plants; it’s truly the best alternative to the present day “crops” or terrestrial plants because seaweed grows so fast. I average 7 – 10% growth rate/day but w/ some tweaking of the system I could achieve 20% growth rate/day!

    can do this anywhere on or near the coastline and integrated w/ wastewater treatment plants. This is huge!!

    The best way to keep the excess nutrients from entering the ecosystem is to get it before it is pumped back into the ecosystem from the wastewater treatment plants, which by the way, in case you didn’t know it; thats what is happening all over the place! disgusting to know that “they” actually let wastewater treatment plants do such practices.

    http://forums.treehugger.com/viewtopic.php?p=22519&highlight=#22519

    Best wishes,

    Steven




Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s



%d bloggers like this: