"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 12:46:26 -0500, Louis Ohland
wrote:
Search google for "bio fuel" and "boondoggle", 47,800 hits.

Right, because anything using such emotionally charged language is
_sure_ to be an accurate, unbiased reference, is that it?

Ethanol, of course, is nothing new. American refiners will produce
nearly 6 billion gallons of corn ethanol this year, mostly for use as a
gasoline additive to make engines burn cleaner. But in June, the Senate
all but announced that America's future is going to be powered by
biofuels, mandating the production of 36 billion gallons of ethanol by
2022. According to ethanol boosters, this is the beginning of a much
larger revolution that could entirely replace our
21-million-barrel-a-day oil addiction.

So, cleaner burning and less foreign oil. If it was a net-negative as
some claim, obviously that wouldn't work. So someone is wrong - either
biased people with a grudge writing emonionally charged rhetoric, or
it's the people investing millions or billions in the projects. I'm
guessing they've done their research.

Dave, the whole deal is a production of Archer Daniels Midland. Once they
developed the market and did the lobbying, independents jumped in. Now ADL,
according to _The Economist_ or the _WSJ_, I forget which, has only 20% of
the market.

But the fact is that *nobody* cared whether it was a real net-energy
producer. ADL wanted to sell more corn products. Farm-state legislators
wanted to sell more corn products, too. And the rest of the government found
themselves a terrific red herring they could use to sound like they were
doing something to combat those evil Arabs and to protect the environment at
the same time.

As far as I'm concerned, it's mostly a hoax. Even if the DOE is correct, and
there's a 20% - 30% net gain, we're still burning a hell of a lot of oil to
produce only a little more (in energy equivalents) ethanol.

This has all the earmarks of a boondoggle with big-time financial payoffs
for a few, and political payoffs for practically everyone in the US
government. It's in the same league with PV solar.

--
Ed Huntress