Text 11445, 119 rader
Skriven 2007-02-02 23:03:00 av Josh Hill (14884.babylon5)
     Kommentar till en text av rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated
Ärende: Re: Cath0licism and Creati=nism
=======================================
On Fri, 2 Feb 2007 21:02:27 -0600, "Carl" <cengman7@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>
>"Josh Hill" <usereplyto@gmail.com> wrote in message=20
>news:6qr7s2tfnonpo30eajjrv38pk3rs2l332o@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 2 Feb 2007 19:02:33 -0600, "Carl" <cengman7@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Well, not exactly.  As I understand it (and I make no pretense to
>>>being an expert)
>>>
>>>1) That price is with a significant subsidy and would require huge out=
lays
>>>     of money to try to keep it at that rate.
>>
>> You seem to be referring to ethanol from corn, which is, in former
>> Governor Pataki's accurate words, a joke. By way of contrast, the
>> $1.30 figure is for cellulosic ethanol, without a subsidy, and is the
>> price quoted by the company that's building the plant to produce it,
>> Iogen. That's still higher than the cost of gasoline (we're talking
>> wholesale prices here), but not horribly so, and it's expected to drop
>> as plants are built to something comparable to gasoline.
>>
>> See forex
>>
>> http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_08/b3921117.htm
>>
>> Also, note that the price would be less susceptible to
>> economically-damaging price swings, and that, in the long term, the
>> price of gasoline will be going up. And there are those who argue that
>> the change is justifiable on the grounds of national economic security
>> alone -- right now, the economy is extremely vulnerable to something
>> like a successful terrorist attack on a major Saudi Arabian oil field.
>>
>>>2) Ethanol is only about 70% as efficient as a fuel, so you'll need to
>>>     buy 30% more of it.
>>
>> Which must of course be taken into account. On the flip side, the
>> externality costs of gasoline -- subsidies and tax breaks, pollution
>> and environmental costs, the cost of defending middle east oil, etc.
>> -- are so high at this point that it may well be more expensive than
>> cellulosic ethanol.
>
>You'd have to turn around and remove the significant additional gas taxe=
s
>to properly calculate that.

But the gas taxes go to paying for highways, and aren't in any case
included in the price comparison. The same taxes would presumably be
levied on ethanol.

>There are other consequences though.  If you suddenly reduce the
>value of the primary source of wealth for the oil producing countries,
>that would have very destabalizing results.

Thomas Friedman sees it the other way around -- he points out that oil
is propping up some of the world's most corrupt and autocratic regimes
-- Iran, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, what have you -- by allowing them to
"buy off" the public, avoid necessary social changes, and finance
terrorism, weapons construction, and islamist madrassahs. In fact, he
mentioned in today's column a possibility that I've toyed with on and
off from a slightly different angle, use of the  price of oil as a
lever against Iran:

'In 2005, Bloomberg.com reported, Iran=92s government earned $44.6
billion from oil and spent $25 billion on subsidies =97 for housing,
jobs, food and 34-cents-a-gallon gasoline =97 to buy off interest
groups. Iran=92s current populist president has further increased the
goods and services being subsidized.

'So if oil prices fall sharply again, Iran=92s regime will have to take
away many benefits from many Iranians, as the Soviets had to do. For a
regime already unpopular with many of its people, that could cause all
kinds of problems and give rise to an Ayatollah Gorbachev. We know how
that ends. . . .

'In short, the best tool we have for curbing Iran=92s influence is not
containment or engagement, but getting the price of oil down in the
long term with conservation and an alternative-energy strategy. Let=92s
exploit Iran=92s oil addiction by ending ours.'

http://select.nytimes.com/2007/02/02/opinion/02friedman.html?_r=3D1&n=3DT=
op%2fOpinion%2fEditorials%20and%20Op%2dEd%2fOp%2dEd%2fColumnists%2fThomas=
%20L%20Friedman&oref=3Dlogin

>>>3) Every gallon of ethanol requires 4 gallons of fresh water to produc=
e.
>>>    There are a number of people starting to become concerned with the
>>>    rate at which our population is taxing our available fresh water.
>>>
>>>    While the oceans may be rising, Lake Michigan (for instance) is do=
wn
>>>    almost two feet from what it was when I was growing up.
>>
>> A figure I haven't heard. I don't know if it applies to cellulosic
>> ethanol, which is made from waste like corn stover and crops that grow
>> on marginal or fallow land like switchgrass.
>
>I have heard that figure from a variety of places often and never
>heard anyone take issue with it.
>
>If you find out if it applies to cellulosic ethanol or not, please let
>me know.

Will do.

--=20
Josh

[Truly] I say to you, [...] angel [...] power will be able to see that [.=
..]
these to whom [...] holy generations [...]. After Jesus said this, he dep=
arted.

- The Gospel of Judas
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)