DescentBB

Finally, the dirty side of ethanol has become apparent.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/secret-d ... wer-push-1

Finally, Obama, who pushed and pushed for ethanol like it was the best solution to our fuel woes when he was elected, has finally seen that really big downside.

http://voices.yahoo.com/obamas-epa-prop ... 09659.html

Now as I sit watching TV, the corn and ethanol industry has begun to see the handwriting on the wall and is now putting out propaganda ads to keep that ethanol monster from being killed off. Let the lobbying begin. Brought to you by: http://www.fuelsamerica.org/pages/about

[youtube]hte4vANhmzA[/youtube]

What did you expect from a president who's intellect is only judged by how well he can deliver a prepared speech? His inability to see more than one side of a issue is scary. I'm wondering if he doesn't have private interest in a carbon tax business waiting for him when he leaves office...you know like Algore does. With all the sequestered carbon now released from all the plowed up land makes Obama's taxing of coal companies seem like one hand not knowing what the other hand is doing.

You're so predictable woody, I wonder if you even read the article that pointed out the laws that made this happen were passed by Bush.

Was watching a NewsHour segment on this the other night…yes passed by Bush…but went astray under Obama.

I don’t blame Obama, but he is a little stubborn at times.

Personally I think we should have done without the small percentage of food, and seen where this was going before committing all that extra land…but everyone was screaming…the little babies will starve and the price of food will skyrocket….neither was true of course.

Krom wrote:You're so predictable woody, I wonder if you even read the article that pointed out the laws that made this happen were passed by Bush.

Ah but I did read:

"This is an ecological disaster," said Craig Cox with the Environmental Working Group, a natural ally of the president that, like others, now finds itself at odds with the White House.

But it's a cost the administration is willing to accept. It believes supporting corn ethanol is the best way to encourage the development of biofuels that will someday be cleaner and greener than today's. Pulling the plug on corn ethanol, officials fear, might mean killing any hope of these next-generation fuels."

So there

...

But it's a cost the administration is willing to accept. It believes supporting corn ethanol is the best way to encourage the development of biofuels that will someday be cleaner and greener than today's. Pulling the plug on corn ethanol, officials fear, might mean killing any hope of these next-generation fuels."..

How long have they been putting corn in gasoline?!? Since forever I think and no one who is getting funded from that process is developing anything except a dependency on subsidized farming and they are trading their votes to keep the government forcing us to burn their corn juice in our engines.

Its just lame. If the guy wants to make excuses for Obama then he should just have the balls to say Hey! At least he isn't a Repub!'

Krom wrote:You're so predictable woody, I wonder if you even read the article that pointed out the laws that made this happen were passed by Bush.

To be fair to woody Krom, Obama took what Bush created and RAN with it like any other self-serving, unprincipled politician trying to mollify his base. And as I recall, there were quite a few environmentalists who were against Big Oil and for for ethanol before they changed their minds.

Bush?

Try this: Congress has been selling corn juice subsidies for votes since Carter!

SSSShhhhhhhh....

yeah, this is hardly a Bush(I or II) thing..........part of a movement to 'save' American farming back when a lot of smaller farmers were going into hock.

I think the point was unintended consequences

flip wrote:I think the point was unintended consequences

nothing gets past you, Flip!!

Will Robinson wrote:

Bush?

Try this: Congress has been selling corn juice subsidies for votes since Carter!

Uuuuuuuuuh, Bush's big "Twenty in Ten" challenge topped it off. That 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act signed by Bush required refiners to mix in 13.2 billion gallons of biofuels, mainly ethanol, into gasoline by 2012, 15 billion by 2015. So between the RFR and the 2007 Act, he trumped all legislation passed before him.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-11-0 ... rkets.html

Romney would have done nothing different than Obama either. But being a businessman, he wouldn't have stepped back like Obama is now doing. Money is God to a capitalist.

http://www.ethanolrfa.org/news/entry/rf ... rt-of-rfs/

TC, are you even bothering to read the stuff you post or did you merely seek a Bill that Bush signed and therefore it is all on him?!?

From your link, first paragraph:

The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (Pub.L. 110-140[1]

originally named the Clean Energy Act of 2007) is an Act of Congress concerning the energy policy of the United States. As part of the Democratic Party's 100-Hour Plan during the 110th Congress,[2] it was introduced in the United States House of Representatives by Representative Nick Rahall of West Virginia, along with 198 cosponsors. Despite Rahall becoming 1 of only 4 Democrats to oppose the final bill,[3] it passed in the House without amendment in January 2007.

It sure looks to me like this was the kind of legislation the Democrats didn't just create but that they were very proud of it. After all it was part of their big first 100 hours publicity campaign!

It's ok to recognize corn juice subsidies are the result of congress since the mid 70's.

No one will be trying to pry your Lib card from your fingers for doing so. But your credibility with people in the real world could increase if you stop trying to squeeze reality through the its all Bush's fault that Obama sucks template.

Yea, it’s kinda weird to pin a bio-fuel bill on an oil man.

A true cynic would say Bush just wanted to reduce gasoline consumption, so it would last to the prices were REALLY high.

Will Robinson wrote:TC, are you even bothering to read the stuff you post or did you merely seek a Bill that Bush signed and therefore it is all on him?!?

From your link, first paragraph:

The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (Pub.L. 110-140[1]

originally named the Clean Energy Act of 2007) is an Act of Congress concerning the energy policy of the United States. As part of the Democratic Party's 100-Hour Plan during the 110th Congress,[2] it was introduced in the United States House of Representatives by Representative Nick Rahall of West Virginia, along with 198 cosponsors. Despite Rahall becoming 1 of only 4 Democrats to oppose the final bill,[3] it passed in the House without amendment in January 2007.

It sure looks to me like this was the kind of legislation the Democrats didn't just create but that they were very proud of it. After all it was part of their big first 100 hours publicity campaign!

It's ok to recognize corn juice subsidies are the result of congress since the mid 70's.

No one will be trying to pry your Lib card from your fingers for doing so. But your credibility with people in the real world could increase if you stop trying to squeeze reality through the its all Bush's fault that Obama sucks template.

Oh, I know the Dems fell into this one like ants on sugar. None of these guys in Washington have any principles, except to big money and for keeping their elected seats. Your fault Will is assuming that the Dems in Washington are actually true liberals and that I like the crap they create, all under the guise of a fake liberalism put out just for show. Far from it. I even stated in the first part of this thread that Obama was just as guilty of pushing this stuff as anyone else involved. In fact, it appears he just followed Bush's track for this whole thing and continued it like a deluded sheep just to make the right people happy. I also later stated that the environmentalist wackos actually embraced the whole stupid idea, at first. Yes, I blame Bush for continuing the push towards ethanol and signing it into law, thrice by the way. But I more so blame Obama for drinking the environmentalist ethanol koolaid of fuel savings and cleaner fuel and not first taking a serious look. He followed Bush's lead and continued the whole idea lock, stock and barrel, all to make him look like a good little liberal earth lover to his fans, when in reality he was sucking up to the corn lobby and ethanol industry. I'm not so blind as to give praise to Obama and disdain only to Bush. Sure, I hate Bush for all the crap he started. But Obama has failed us too. But at least he's had the sense to start pulling back from this idiotic mess, but only just barely does that start to get him out of the hole he's dug for himself.

Why do you say he followed Bush's lead when Bush was approximately 20 years old and had nothing to do with signing legislation when the real "lead" was forwarded?!?
CONGRESS creates legislation and LOBBIESTS sell votes to political parties. Corn growers and all who depend on that industry push for subsidies that keep the corn juice flowing into fuels.

Obama didn't follow Bush's lead, they both did what they do to get their hands on the money that wouldn't be there if not for the way we let the PARTIES raise money to buy elections.

You are forever trying to fit the problem with our system through a template that allows you to differentiate between Party when it is the big Capitol building full of liars with R's and D's by their names that have poisoned the process. Obama didn't write the Bill....Bush didn't write the Bill.... that led the corn subsidy gravy train out of the station and down the track.

If you want to be mad about the bullet hitting innocent people stop blaming the brand of the gun! Blame the one who pulled the trigger. Congress (as we have allowed it to mold itself) pulled the trigger.

worth pointing out is that this legislation had to be renewed annually, as part of the Farm bill, which further confirms Will's statements.

You're right Will. Presidents have no say in what congress mandates. But I do notice that the beginning of the ethanol surge started in 2007, when Bush signed into law the mandate to blend ethanol into gasoline. But I'll acquiesce Will, because both parties rallied behind that bill as the great solution to our national energy woes. So in 2008, Obama kept his campaign promise to Iowa corn farmers to substantially raise ethanol output, and by design, corn production, which he did, by quite a large amount.

http://www.indexmundi.com/energy.aspx?p ... onsumption