http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2008/04/14/ccview114.xml The ethanol boondoggle is causing global food shortages. Is the price of alternative fuel and global warming hysteria riots and famine? Sick stuff.
Not only are people going to starve, some of us will freeze to death in the cold from global warming.... errr I mean climate change. Snow again and it is the middle of April. The peak of global warming was in 98 and has been flat (a bit cooler) since then even though CO2 emissions have been higher. al gore is a profiteer, he doesn't care who suffers as long as he gets paid.
Just topped 90 in Southern Arizona...but only a simpleton thinks that local year-to year weather changes are evidence of overall global patterns. The backlash against biofuel smells of Chevron to me-someone seems genuinely scared. This "ethanol food shortage" is full of holes, notwithstanding the quote from the UN official, which looks out of context to me. All he says is, people are already starving. He doesn't say from biofuel related food shortages. That implication is made by a very biased "journalist." A few facts: 1. As a commenter on that article you cited pointed out, the corn which is used for ethanol IS NOT USED FOR HUMANS! It is used principally in feeding grain cattle, like roughly 50% of the corn produced in North America. Much of the rest of it is used as cheap sweetener in soda and other "foods." 2. There is no shortage of corn, and this particular corn is being diverted from the meat industry, where a hundred pounds of feed goes into every kilo of dried beef. Corn is the cheapest, most overproduced crop on the planet. 3. To feed the poor of the world with North American corn (which is not happening) would require transportation fuels of tremendous quantity. 4. Corn is not the highest-yielding fuel crop, not by far. It is the most ubiquitous, which is doubtless why it has been chosen, wrongly, as the model for crop-based biofuels. The implication that biofuels are cutting in to the food supply is totally specious nonsense, served up by petro-corporation shills and lapped up by those who'd hate to think it's so easy to get off of fossil fuels. Corn is probably not the best fuel production crop, but the notion of a corn shoratge is a little laughable. Have you been to the midwest? Nothing but corn! And 18% going to biofuel? Half of that rotted and unusable? This is a red herring of the highest order. And why do detractors of biofuel always make it a debate on global warming, as if that's the only reason to prefer fuel be sustainably produced rather than mined?
The corn used is junk corn - you are correct, but you have missed a lot of other details. Those who grew edible corns and other crops are switching because of profitability. Less food grains grown and more junk. Now this corn should NOT be fed to cows anyways, but that is how they keep beef at the prices they had been. The corn fattened up the cows fast (even though it is bad for the cow, which didn't matter because they would kill the cow before it died) So we will be seeing a shift in the US which will affect those who get the free grains from the USA. If you don't think things will change, then you are blind. Will time swing things back around to where we produce enough food grains again? When food grain prices go up, then others will switch crops to more profitable ones. The global warming crowd has taken it all as fact and do not allow for questions, just like most of the evolution crowd, which seems to be one and the same. Neither group will allow for dissent as though they have all the facts.
We'll talk facts...and yes, I do believe in evolution and hope that some is occurring among yesterday's thinkers. Again you invoke global warming! And that is how we can tell you're not thinking for yourself. So let's go over it again, shall we? 1. Petro-fuel prices will top $4.00 a gallon this year. The cost can not be measured in the loss of human life in Middle East and Asian conflicts precipitated principally by the need for foreign oil. The domestic reserves will become even more expensive when foreign supplies decline. 2. Beside CO2 emissions, drilling and transporting oil is a pollution-prone affair. Oil spills are notoriously difficult to clean up, and will occur in your backyard if domestic sources become primary. 3. Perhaps you don't believe in global warming, do you believe in smog? Have you been to LA? Corn may not be the best source for fuel (algae shows tremendous promise) but growing it for fuel gives struggling midwest farmers a chance to keep their farms and maybe turn a bit of a profit-something selling cattle feed has not been doing. Even conservatives should support biofuel-produced domestically, providing opportunities to farmers, and improving US security by reducing foreign energy dependence. Is it just that you hate Al Gore so much?
I can't wait til the next "global warming" type fad for you to follow. I am going to assume you graduated from school in the last 10 years where they have been teaching evolution as fact instead of admitting to it's shortcomings. The only thing the public schools do these days is produce mindless sheep that believe it because the teacher said so. Then the kid goes to college and thinks that a professor knows all and can not be questioned. In fact you would get expelled for questioning. Sad place we live that when someone questions the get ridiculed by the masses. The masses who are like cattle, easily swayed by a barking dog. al gore is just a profiteer, he can't even put up charts correctly and people still fall for it. He used many of the same "math" techniques that the media will use, that so many just don't see and many can't understand when explained. You may want to do a little bit of questioning, because even experts are wrong about things.
I'll leave my opinions on evolution for a thread where that would be on-topic...but you do make some assumptions, don't you? Three times now I have said it, maybe you'll find a different argument this time. My support of biofuel has nothing to do with global warming. It has to do with US foreign policy. That's why we've gone to the expense and trouble to run on pure biodiesel for the past two years. See, quite a few hundred thousand people have recently died in oil-driven conflicts. Many of them have been American, many more have been of other countries. The war in Iraq was fought, as I publicly predicted at the outset, to double the price of oil. Mission accomplished.
This is incorrect. Oil is up 3x in USD, but only 2x in Euros, and at par in Gold. http://www.thedailygreen.com/environmental-news/latest/oil-gold-commodities-47041507 The problem with gas and oil prices, like most commodities, is inflation.
So it's just a coincidence that US prices have doubled since the invasion of Iraq? Just inflation? Inflation caused by what? Perhaps a shortage in the supply of oil, which was disrupted by US military action in the Persian Gulf? Inflation occurs when demand exceeds supply. And how exactly will the supply of petroleum be restored?
Uhm, no. An increase in the monetary supply, hence why consumer prices are rising, housing prices have risen etc. No. That's incorrect. Inflation is not a rise in prices. Inflation is an increase in the monetary supply. If the aggregate supply of money was consistent, rising gas prices would be offset by falling prices elsewhere. Whatever you think you know economically, is very incorrect.
This from the one who posted that worldwide food shortages are being caused by ethanol. I know when statistics lie. Inflation results in an increase of price and typically follows shortages in the fuel supply, as it did in the 70's. The increase in costs which we currently see in the market is a direct result of the value-added cost of shortage-inflated transportation. Or do you actually claim the rising oil costs and attending prices are caused by an increase in currency supply?
Did you read the article? Ethanol alone isn't the problem, but it's a big part of it. I did actually claim that rising oil costs are caused by an increase in the monetary supply. In fact, this is a definition of inflation. http://www.answers.com/topic/inflation?cat=biz-fin Then how do you explain the difference in the purchasing power of gold, Euros and USDs? Very simple, you can't. Currencies are traded real time with commodities. The only way a currency can be so much weaker over a period of time has to do with devaluation of that currency. Again, you know so much that isn't true. And because you are economically misinformed, you jump to incorrect conclusions.
I'm neither prepared nor interested in opening up a debate on who is more capable of twisting economic semantics to discredit real objections to your very weak argument. You opened a thread by linking to a very deceptive article which spins biofuel as a cause of food shortages, when in fact we know that these shortages are caused by other factors. Please explain to me how using cattle feed for fuel is causing human starvation? Especially when that fuel leaves a waste product which is still suitable for livestock feed? The relative strength of the dollar and Euro is largely a matter of economic confidence, the dollar is weakening due to war-enriched debt and other results of the fiscal mismanagement by this fraudulently installed administration. In addition, fuel costs are more severe in the US as major cities are spread farther apart and there is less reliance on alternative transportation as in Europe. I'm sure there are other factors, I'm not an economist, but your definition does not say what you say it does: In other words, without obfuscation, inflation is a rise in prices caused by more money than goods, that is to say, a relative shortage.
Gas has only doubled in Canada and Australia as well. So the distance issue is horsecrap. as far as relative economic confidence, the dollar is down against everyone. Even the so-so economies. Your theory doesn't withstand basic scrutiny. Show me your proof that the supply of oil has declined and you might have a case. I can show the growth in the monetary supply during this period. I realize you want to be mad at Bush, mad at Republicans, mad about the war, and want to save the environment. The problem is, those are all symptoms, not the disease, and through problem, reaction, solution, you are being manipulated. Get some real, tangible knowledge. Discover some cynicism for the left that matches your cynicism for the right, and you just might be onto something. Because global warming and peak oil are hoaxes. The sooner you sort out the truth from the lies, the sooner you will be free.
The two items are very related, they go hand in hand. changing directions then... ok. Quite the opposite, it was publicly predicted to lower the price of oil to make Bush a hero, and for a period the prices were going down and they said "we were right" - then a month later it was publicly predicted that the price would go up to profit Bush's oil company that he own - exxon, after the prices started going up. Kind of like global warming gurus claiming that cold weather would be part of the climate changes caused by global warming. The technique of chasing the tail is as old as the dog. Now if you talk with scientists who study things such as the sun, you will get a whole other opinion based on scientific theory. One that uses measurable facts with actual visible events to come up with their theory.
Your theory is flawed too. Price is determined by demand as well as supply. You claim that prices can be held steady by keeping demand (money availability) constant. This can be true only if the supply side (commodities) is kept constant. ================================================== I will give an example. Suppose you spend $100 to purchase 1 barrel of crude oil every year. there is just 1 buyer of oil in your area and one seller. (Your income is constant.) Now, one day, the oil seller thinks that he doesn't want to sell oil at $100, but at $110. What will you do? You need that 1 barrel, so you have no choice but to pay the seller $110. Your income did not increase. (money supply was constant). The oil demand was constant, oil supply was constant and yet the price increased. why? bcoz the demand is inflexible. the supplier demanded a higher price as he knows that oil is essential. he will keep increasing the prices till he thinks you will buy at. this is what is happening right now - both with oil and food. unless there is additional supply available or a substitute available, the demand for these commodities is inflexible. the arab countries know that the world needs oil for growth. even if they keep the production steady, they can keep increasing the prices by refusing to sell at lower prices. ================================================== actually even the demand is not steady, but increasing. The demand for food as well as energy is increasing with growth in the global economy. Developing countries like China and India are consuming more and more fuel and food. The supply is not able to keep pace with the growth in demand and hence these problems. ================================================== there are lot of other factors that are pushing up food prices and it is only going to get worse. here is a nice analysis on food crisis and rising prices.
Fuel costs were already higher in these places, which are also less dependent on foreign oil. I'm not going to go digging for links which show exactly why this is. Even a doubling in price of a basic commodity is unusual over six years, so I'm not sure what you're getting at. The price has risen because of political instability and unreliability of the Iraqi supply, in addition to rising demand and consciousness of imminenent absolute depletion. I'm not sure what you mean, but yes, worldwide reserves are in decline, this is obvious as it has been produced over millions of years from natural mass graves and can not be replaced no matter how many Iraqis are killed in the fighting. The relative production has decreased in relation to the demand, I believe that's how markets work, no? The price is higher because supply can not meet demand. Or is there some other reason for a worldwide surge in petroleum prices? Did you hear this from Rush Limbaugh? And this is annoying, how many times do I have to tell you that I'm not concerned with global warming? I'm worried about a sustainable energy economy that won't lead to war. But I suppose that makes me a mindless liberal. Really, I'm just here to make sure more people don't get infected by this pro-oil hype. Yes, it is running out, getting more expensive all the time, it has already peaked, and the last half will be the hardest to extract. No one knows exactly how much there is, but when oil runs out, we should have other mechanisms in place, hopefully ones which won't be so careless with pollution. Are you in support of pollution? Or do you simply not associate it with burning fossil fuels?
Global warming is made up to the extent that Gore and all of them say. We should find a susbtitute that does not use food. Especially since the corn based fuel is realy no better for the planet then oil.
Uhm, no. You did not understand it. And until you can explain the difference in the price of oil in 3 different payment formats, USD, EUR and Gold, then you're just fabricating perfect scenarios to make your case. Aggregate pricing will not change significantly if the money supply is not inflating. As far as demand for oil, you are correct. But again, I can prove that inflation due to monetary expansion is a reasonable theory from the actual numbers reflecting the money pumped into the system. Can anyone show me any proof that the supply of oil has decreased, or has not increased relative to demand? PROOF. You can make all of the supply and demand arguments you want, without the numbers to back it up, you're just wasting everyones time.
No links, the point is worthless. The fuel costs in those economies doesn't matter. The distance between cities doesn't matter. If I had 100 Euros and 100 USD 6 years ago, and I went to by oil today, I could buy 50% more oil with my Euros than I could my USD. Plain and simple, American are paying more for oil than most if not all 1t world countries over this period. Supply/Demand sources? Or are you just theorizing? The doubling is due to European monetary expansion. Oil prices in gold are consistent. I imagine it's also consistent in silver, platinum, copper etc. When commodities as a mass move, not just one particular product or sector, it's not indicative of a supply/demand resource issues. I'm somewhat sure the mass grave theory has been debunked by the oil they found on another planetary body in the solar system. But of course, using oil up will decrease the supply. It is a finite resource. You're recycling the discussion. I'm waiting for proof that demand has exceeded supply. No. I refuse to participate in the left right paradigm. You won't be able to pigeonhole me as a republican or democrat. I float between minarchism and anarcho-capitalism. We didn't go to war only over oil. Do you know what PNAC is? You may be a mindless liberal, but you choose that for yourself, not me. There is nothing wrong with oil. When alternatives are feasible, the market will provide them. Oil will not "run out". As it becomes scarcer, the price will go up, until even the most inefficient and expensive alternatives are cheaper. Basic economics of the market. I don't support pollution. But there are a lot of problems in this world, pollution is just one of them.