Zero fossil fuels
11 responses | 0 likes
Started by wglassfo - Aug. 17, 2020, 7:31 p.m.

Anybody considering voting for Biden should take a look at California and there alternative wind power electric grid

Rolling black outs as evening approaches and solar doesn't do so well

Also wind power can't keep up

Biden wants all of us to use alternative electric sources

Will we be like California

Comments
By metmike - Aug. 17, 2020, 10:10 p.m.
Like Reply

He's adopted the Bernie Sanders, "Green New Deal" plan that can't work based on the laws of physics, science and energy......and the made up climate crisis(as our greening planet experiences the best weather/climate in the last 1,000 years during this climate optimum)



Sea levels, in 8 or 9 years will be around 1 inch higher...........but this is what Bernie claims:

                Bernie Sanders fake climate scare            

           

                12 responses |        

                Started by metmike - Jan. 20, 2020, 5:12 p.m.            

                                        

Bernie Sanders: ‘Major Cities Going Under Water’ in ‘8 or 9 Years’ Due to Climate Change

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/46122/



Sanders Touts $16 Trillion Climate Plan: Anti Science Bernie = the complete opposite of the truth! August 2019

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/37437/


Bernie is on tv right now at the convention telling us that Trump is rejecting the science. I like Bernie's health care/socialized medicine, uniform coverage plan but on climate, his lies are MUCH bigger than any told by Trump.

He says the future of our planet is at stake because of the climate emergency.

The reality is, if we change nothing between now and 2030(the year of the supposed apocalypse) , the planet will warm up another .1 deg. C ( 1 tenth of 1 deg. C). The oceans will be around 1 inch higher.  The planet will be even greener form the increasing beneficial CO2 and crop yields/food production will be even higher.......and authentic science/biology will continue to refer to it as a climate OPTIMUM.

The climate crisis/emergency only exists based on political interpretations.

And based on worst case scenarios of speculative computer model simulations using busted models.

Here's the rock solid proof that the equations they are using in the models are doubling the actual greenhouse affect. 


NEW: Smoking Gun!  Proof with accurate 2 decade long measurement of the actual amount of radiative forcing caused by CO2 WHY global climate models continue to be too warm. Climate emergency is really about justice and brainwashing people to get it.  August 2020 https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/57636/




By metmike - Aug. 17, 2020, 10:11 p.m.
Like Reply

Renewable vs fossil fuels: Diffuse solar vs dense fossil fuels. Benefits of CO2. September 2019

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/39321/


Another secret about fossil fuels: Haber Bosch process-fertilizers feeding the planet using natural gas-doubling food production/crop yields. September 2019

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/39215/


Green New Deal-corn ethanol: Good bye corn ethanol, Hello $2 corn prices again....$5 soybeans/supply gluts/ August 2019

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/38089/


Renewable energy:  When can it replace fossil fuels? August 2019

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/35846/

By metmike - Aug. 18, 2020, 9:19 a.m.
Like Reply

Producers should know that the green new deal means no more corn ethanol added to fossil fuel gasoline.

You don't add ethanol to solar or wind power and there will never be vehicles powered on 100% ethanol.


The price of corn will start with a 2 again, with beans and other crops cheaper too as corn acres plunge and go to other crops

By wglassfo - Aug. 18, 2020, 9:23 a.m.
Like Reply

We race stock cars on 100% alcohol

Isn't ethanol alcohol

By metmike - Aug. 18, 2020, 9:26 a.m.
Like Reply

Wayne,

I'll have more back at my computer explaining why that would never work.

By metmike - Aug. 18, 2020, 11:55 a.m.
Like Reply

I'm shocked that the republicans/Trump are not telling farmers that Bidens plan.......absolutely means no more ethanol.

It REPLACES every combustion engine with electric or something carbon neutral(hydrogen might be viable but can't be mixed with ethanol).


The Green New Deal  means no more ethanol. Brazil has vehicles that use 100% ethanol but they use combustion engines and those will not be getting manufactured to use ethanol under the green bad deal.

 

Ethanol is also the most polluting, anti environmental crop of all by a wide margin. As an environmentalist, I campaigned against ethanol for numerous years here. I softened that position a few years ago, based on seeing the benefits to the agricultural economy(that I am very tuned into)  justifying the many negatives.


2020 Democrats embrace Green New Deal at their peril in Iowa, land of ethanol 

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/democratic-2020-hopefuls-embrace-green-new-deal-at-their-peril-in-iowa-land-of-ethanol

By metmike - Aug. 18, 2020, 12:11 p.m.
Like Reply

I totally understand why farmers are cheerleaders for ethanol. If that was my business, I could see it no other way.

I've known, maybe 100 producers in my life(enough to have at least a personal relationship with)  and of all of them, never heard a peep about any REAL negatives regarding ethanol.

Not that  it came up with most of them but when it did, ethanol is seen only 1 way...........how it affects their pocketbooks.


With that being the case and me having numerous good farmer friends reading this right now, who's relationship I don't want to jeopardize, a few years ago, I decided to see things thru their eyes...............the benefits to the agricultural economy and to turn off the environmentalist in me/stop the ethanol bashing metmike that existed previously.


Consistent with that, since we are discussing it and I want to be REAL(not just represent an agenda or 1 side) I will let the comment(s) at this link speak for the legit, anti ethanol position that opposes the pro agricultural economy side and state that I see both sides:

https://www.quora.com/Why-isnt-ethanol-used-more-widely-as-an-automobile-fuel

Why isn't ethanol used more widely as an automobile fuel?

John Flavin, Years of downstream interventionUpdated June 13, 2017 · Upvoted by Omkar Desai, M.S. Energy & Chemical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati (2020) · Author has 2.5K answers and 9.2M answer views

According to a Cornell University study: It takes more energy to make ethanol from grain than the combustion value ethanol produces. An acre of U.S. corn yields about 7,110 pounds of corn for processing into 328 gallons of ethanol. But planting, growing and harvesting that much corn requires about 140 gallons of fossil fuels and costs $347 per acre to produce.

 

A government mandate established that every gallon of fuel would contain no less than 10% ethanol. The misguided Energy Policy Act of 2005 included an addendum called the Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS) and includes federal and state subsidies totaling $1 billion per year. This policy bites US citizens multiple times. The first bite is that the scheme requires intervention with tax dollars, next the gasoline tax paid at the pump can be as high as 0.80 cents per gallon, and the blend of gasoline and ethanol makes the final product more expensive. The pain continues. Corn is a major constituent of livestock feed. Since half the corn crop is dedicated to the fuel business, corn prices naturally went up. The increase in grain prices is passed on to the consumer who must pay a higher price for meat, milk and eggs. To add insult to injury, this government Ponzi scheme is bad for the environment.

 

  1. Corn production in the U.S. erodes soil about 12 times faster than the soil can be reformed
  2. Irrigating corn requires groundwater and reduces the water table 25% faster than the natural recharge rate.
  3. The environment and ground where corn is being produced is being rapidly degraded.
  4. Landowners filled in wetlands, and plowed up pristine prairies, all the time releasing carbon dioxide that had been locked in the soil.
  5. Sprayers pumped out billions of pounds of fertilizer, some of which seeped into drinking water, contaminated rivers and worsened the huge dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico where marine life can’t survive.
  6. The consequences are so severe that environmentalists and many scientists have now rejected corn-based ethanol as a bad environmental policy.
  7. The fermentation process continuously releases CO2
  8. Government subsidies immediately drove land values higher from $350.00/acre to $5,000/acre guaranteeing that soil leeching corn production continues.

Multiple studies urging a fundamental review of Renewable Fuels legislation have not moved the Obama administration. The president stands by the plan, highlighting its benefits to the farming industry rather than any negative impact.

 

By metmike - Aug. 18, 2020, 12:22 p.m.
Like Reply

I am not bringing this up because of any pro Trump anti Biden political bias.


It's a rock solid fact, like everything else that I try to present honestly and objectively here. 

The Bernie Sanders Green New Deal that Biden has adopted WILL make corn ethanol go away.

You will note all the things that it promises to do:

1. Save the planet.

2. Create new jobs

3. Provide clean affordable energy to replace fossil fuels


Are total bs.

1. The planet is greening up and having a climate optiumum and doesn't need saving.

2. More jobs will be lost from the fossil fuel industry than created.

3. Energy prices WILL go higher, especially in the early phases with big carbon taxes imposed, that turn into energy use taxes. Fossil fuels are cheap, reliable, abundant and much more power concentrated than green energy. In many ways, LESS polluting because you dont need millions of acres of wind turbines and solar panels to obtain it. 

Another misleading item related to this is going to electric cars. Where do they think the electricity will come from............fairly dust?

It has to be generated at massive power plants..............using, what form of energy?

We can only produce a tiny fraction of our power now using solar and wind for heating/cooling/home electric. We would have to cover a huge portion of the  US in solar panels/wind turbines to replace fossil fuels that included generating all the additional demand from all the vehicles in the US. 

Their plan CAN'T work. It's just not viable based on physics, chemistry/science,  energy, geography(or common sense) and is economically very dishonest. 



But here is one promise that they don't give us, which is the only legit one that WILL really happen.

4. Replace corn based ethanol as a fuel.  Electric cars don't use combustion engines.........period. 



By metmike - Aug. 18, 2020, 1:44 p.m.
Like Reply

The other thing too is storage of the massive amounts of energy.

The energy produced from solar and wind has to be stored somewhere. Then from that storage place, transferred to another storage place....car battery.

There is also a loss of energy in this process.

With fossil fuels, it’s stored in the fuel. It’s in the coal. It’s in the natural gas or gasoline.

You just burn it.


It’s like having the fuel AND the battery at the same time built in to the same thing.

By wglassfo - Aug. 18, 2020, 2:51 p.m.
Like Reply

Mike

You said an acre of corn produces 7110 lbs of corn

That must be some numbers from 1950

Today the natn'l projeced average yield is  {I think] 183 bu/acre]

!83 bu X 56 lb/bu is way more than 7110 lbs

Todays efficiency of production has gone way past 7110 lbs of corn/acre with little increase in cost/acre

You say the internal engine will disappear

Not for some time

How do you get a battery to produce 600 H.P for even 12 hrs a day let alone 18 hrs or more day after day

Highway trucks range from 350 H.P to 600 H.P

Farm tractors range from 10 H.P to 600 H.P

How you goona re-charge some commercial mining equipment with 1000 H.P engines in 24 hr work cycles

Brazil does not have the electric grid required nor will they, to re-charge 600 H.P farm equipment electric engines in low population  agricultural areas

Biden has nothing to say about Brazil other than we won't grow crops and Brazil will grow more

I don't care what Biden or Sanders wants, it isn't goona happen or the food supply will shrink by magnitudes never even thought about, in the USA

Forget ethanol, just food production will be a problem with electric engines

Somebody who never grew one acre of crops thinks they know what is required [electric engines] has no clue

Goona be junk yards full of scrap internal combustion equipment

Who will/can afford to re-vamp entire lines of new equipment to produce food, with 100 H.P or less

In 1967, when I started farming, we had 100 H.P plus farm equipment engines

What you want and what you get is entirely different in the real world

Bernie will be forced to  back track his electric engine policy big time on a lot of applications re: the internal combustion engine vs. electric engines

2.00 dollar corn just means bigger farm subsidy cheques, and paying to not grow crops

You think the banks won't have some thing to say about 2.00 corn

You think Biden will  BK every ethanol production facility in the country

What does Biden mean when he says alternative energy??

Just throwing stuff out there and I bet some of it sticks to the wall

By metmike - Aug. 18, 2020, 9:12 p.m.
Like Reply

Wayne,


"You said an acre of corn produces 7110 lbs of corn"

No, I thought I made it clear that I was copying a post from somebody else that stated that, along with other good/legit points regarding that  side of the issue, while the other side is the benefits to the agricultural economy, which is the one that I have been giving the most weight to in recent years(in trying to see things, mostly thru the eyes of farmers). 

I can assure you that being the moderator of a trading forum with a bunch of farmer friends has caused a bias here and the environmentalist in me, yells at me for doing this every time. 

In this case, I would prefer to not get into  a discussion on the merits of ethanol overall outside of the benefits to the agricultural community............because its very one sided against it.

Those are fighting words to a farmer and would involve a totally impossible to resolve difference of opinion. 

Instead, it makes more sense to discuss the future of ethanol based on political policies. 

Corn ethanol exists entirely based on politics. It's future will be entirely determined by politics.

Since the Green New Deal is a physical impossibility, we know that fossil fuels will continue(with increasing carbon taxes) despite the fairy tale plans to replace fossil fuels.  

However, I am just exposing the fraudulence of this marketing scheme that exists to try to generate votes with  (false) promises that can't be kept and a downside(including no more ethanol) that is not told. 

The Green New Deal to the agricultural community is like...........water was to the Wicked Witch of the West (-:

Or like kryptonite was to Superman (-:


Those are fake characters and so is the Green New Deal but its being sold as something real. 

Just like the fake climate crisis................and for the same reason.