Comments about ‘Ethanol mandate a flop’

Amen to that. I think in response to a congressional command on economic policy we should make them all read "Atlas Shrugged" 5 times over.

A push from Congress and the White House for huge increases in bio fuels such as ethanol, is prompting the oil industry to scale back its plans for refinery expansions.*********************
We now have radical environmentalist guiding our government.......................
Billions of dollars for green technology and forcing citizens to leave dead, dried, rotted trees and underbrush beside their homes and out buildings. This To preserve the natural beauty and orange glow of life killing fires on the horizons.***************** Notice the recent re-burnings of California and Australia.. Also the killing of tens of millions of small animals burned to death at the hands of environmental idiots, that swear they are trying to protect..... Environmentalist Should be force to look at the lifeless burned out Kola Bears and baby kangaroos- Not a pretty scene I can assure you. Yes!- Our planet is in danger- but not from Global Warming- ***Global Idiots***.

The ethanol problem is minor compared to what can be done with the new trillion dollar efforts coming out of Washington. Congress has always been the problem. Free enterprise works, but there are few in Washington who believe or support that idea.

The title says it all.

I cant think of anyone I've spoken with who thought ethanol was a good idea. It's about the Iowas Caucus, and lip service from politicians saving the enviroment when they are actually destroying it. Sorry I hope all of those companies go bankrupt and people learn a valuable lesson that food is not energy.

Congress needs to get out of the way, but ethanol was pushed very hard by Pres. Bush. Who knows what Obama will do.

I thought the "consensus was in". The "Experts had spoken". And our wise leaders just took their advice and like good little drones they just did what the Enviro-Wackos and Any-change-is-good folks told them they had to do or the earth would burst into flames within months!

Classic example of our political leader's tendency to jump at things they feel forced into out of their fear response to looking like they weren't doing enough to legislate the day-to-day behavior of the little people they have been elected to lead, the little people who can't make decisions for themselvs, and the under-regulated and under-legislated market that needs THEIR wise guidance and legislative influence to make it things better.

As in most cases where Congress decides they need to step in and make things "Better". They end up making stupid decisions that end up having the opposite results but now they can't be changed because their snap-decisions have now become legislation that can't be turned back (because they are GREAT at passing laws in response to a media_crisis, but terrible at admitting mistakes or REMOVING ineffective laws).

As always, until people stop looking to government to solve economic problems, mostly generated by legislative stupidity, we will continue to ride this economic rollercoaster. We cannot legislate economy.

Our Savior is President Obama. He we save us from ourselves and we will love him for it. All praises to the anointed one. He will cool the planet (it has been snowing). He will nationalize our banks and save our money. He will make sure everyone is special so no can have their feeling hurt. He will save our planet!!! and Mars (it has been snowing there too)!

Ethanol was never a good idea to begin with. It trades one type of air pollution for another, uses valuable cropland and water to produce, and is barely a wash in producing more energy than required to make it.

It reduces fuel mileage, and therefore does not cut air pollution. Try measuring gas mileage in your car with and without ethanol, and like me you'll find mileage drops 10% when ethanol is added.

Regardless of what the enviromentalists and to the left proffessirs every dollar spent on ethanol stya in the united States and benifits some us citizen. Otherwise we're borrowing money and trasfering it to the Islamic nations who are waiting for our enviromentalists and nutty proffessors to spend us dry trying to save the enviroment. Look at the land the Islamic hordes control and tell me what they'll do when they gain control of the USA. their lans are their example.

This sums it all up - If con is the opposite of pro, then is Congress the opposite of progress?

I like the idea of producing our own fuel as Charley points out why would we support Islamic terror. Brazil is given as the best example of an ethanol economy. However only 1/4 of their fuel is ethanol, the rest is from new oil discoveries. We should go to natural gas. Exxon just announced a field that would support 50 million homes for 10 years. In 10 years the electric car is supposed to be the thing.

But they were saving the world from global warming and Saudi terrorists!!!

They had to act with this quick knee-jerk reaction or be criticised for not acting quick enough!

How could it be a flop?

Sound like any other recent "Hurry UP" issue Congress had to rush through and assure us all it's for our own good?

Maybe they can do just as good a job with Nationalized Healthcare!

It's a shame that blind hatred of environmentalist fog the truth here.

Ethanol was generous taxpayer subsidie for ADM and Cargill. I'm an evil environmentalist. I knew that the imputes to manufacture ethanol made it a bad deal for our economy and the environment.

It was studying science that made me realize humans are linked to the quality of their environment. I'm a Utahan. I read about Utah and the down winders? I also studied chemistry. I know the energy available from Ethanol is about half of gasoline in terms of British thermal units (BTU's).

As I'm come to expect from the new age religion of conservatism, lies are acceptable to spread the faith.

My liberal professors taught me not to just parrot words of a self proclaimed messiah like Limbaugh but to do research to discover the truth.

Ethanol was corporate welfare.

Ethanol is just one of many examples where Congress has good intentions with bad consequences. The idea was good, but the reprocussions of using up food to produce fuel was bad.

If you read the news, the US is now encouraging the world to cut down on its use of Mercury. Well, Congress, early last year, mandated an end to the incandescent bulb, which means CFL bulbs. Do they realize that with the increased demand they created, that now the US is going to be dumping more mercury into its landfills and such because of their CFL mandate?

How about Social Security, at the time, the average life expectancy was only 65, now it is much longer. Oops, they didn't expect people to actually be healthy and receive benefits.

We have the racial preferences that go on to encourage minorities to go to college. We now have fewer minorities completing college or having doubts about themselves because they don't know if they were accepted because of race or because of qualifications.

The list goes on and on, Congress always has good intentions but bad consequences.

As usual, it is a constant drumbeat that Utahns are the "blind followers." What is the agenda behind labeling religious people and those who speak out against the hoax of global warming - I mean climate change - as parroting and blind following? How are you so sure it's not the people on the other side who are the blind followers? Is it possible to have a civil discussion about climate change, mandates of renewables, etc. Do we just vote on it that makes one side right and the other wrong? What if the vote is 50-50?
I've tried my best to listen quietly to Pelosi, Frank, Reid, Franken, Dodd, Shumer, Biden, Obama; they continually take my breath away. I find myself asking how we can live on the same planet and think so oppositely. How did they end up thinking that way and I end up thinking my way? Is your only answer that I'm blind?

Your average V6 gets about 27 mpg on gasoline. The same engine setup to run on ethanol gets about 15 mpg when buning the plant fuel. Enough said.

Ethanol is working great in Brazil,as mentioned earlier. It will here too in time. Keep the government out of it and let private industry handle it, and it will be the death nail for OPEC.

What kind of dummy thinks it's a good idea to burn OUR food supply for fuel?

It drive UP the cost our food.

Just because some other place does is does NOT mean it is a good idea here.

IT has been is proven to be worse in pollution and less efficient!

Do any liberals and enviromental wackos have any common sense?

"Your average V6 gets about 27 mpg on gasoline. The same engine setup to run on ethanol gets about 15 mpg when burning the plant fuel. Enough said." As I wrote earlier, ethanol has about 60% of the energy as gas measured in BTU's. On the other side, diesel has more energy than gas has. If your are agribusiness, how can you get more for your corn and market ethanol?

Brazil uses sugar cane. The Brazilian government mandated that car be able to run on ethanol. Brazil isn't an example of free market driving change.