Re: [RC] [RC] Cost of hay - Mike and Laurie Hilyard
From what I've read, nukes and wind are energy
positive - that is, they produce more energy than it takes to start the
process. Ethanol is about energy neutral - it takes as much energy from
fossil fuels to make the same amount of energy as ethanol. Ethanol is not
as efficient as gasoline - your miles per gallon goes down - plus you have the
cost of the tilling, harvesting, transporting and processing. Obviously,
oil has some of the same expenses, but not as much. The government
likes ethanol because the delivery system is in place, via the existing oil
companies, so it can be taxed and monitored without difficulty. If I
were power hungry enough to want to be president, I'd build a nuke plant every
100 miles, and reprocess the rods just like the rest of the world does, instead
of throwing them away and having tons of radioactivity to deal with instead of
pounds. Maybe I'd better go pet my horse (who's value is now
about $200, until they close the last of the slaughter
plants).
I guess I don't understand anyone
dislike of ethanol. I live in the corn belt and I see thousands of pounds of
corn sitting on the ground at elevators, rotting because we are not "using"
it. I see hundreds of acres of great farm ground in set aside again because we
are not using the crops the land could be producing. I would love to see all
cars/trucks using a product from the USA instead of foreign oil then all that
corn would be used. I am paying up to 30 cents less a gallon for ethanol here.
Sure it does use energy to produce ethanol but it can and should use energy we
produce in the USA again getting us away from foreign oil. This country is
finally again seeing the value in Nuke and wind power.
