Re: The deaf, dumb, and blind biofuel cultists have yet another heavy issue to explain away!

On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 11:52:25 -0700 (PDT), Curt
<obadiahlynch@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> mumbled:

>On Mar 12, 11:26 am, Owl Cafe & Filling Station <et...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 11:11:08 -0700 (PDT), Curt
>> <obadiahly...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> mumbled:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Mar 11, 6:02 pm, Owl Cafe & Filling Station <et...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >> On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 17:06:13 -0700 (PDT), Curt
>> >> <obadiahly...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> mumbled:
>>
>> >> >On Mar 11, 2:04 pm, "gatt" <ad...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >> >> "Owl Cafe & Filling Station" <et...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
messagenews:fdsdt3to8cva7327ieqbfkpsv0qmirecus@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> >> >> > On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 11:59:11 -0700, "gatt"
<ad...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> >> >> > mumbled:
>>
>> >> >> >>As usual.   The talk show hosts, political journalists and
politicians
>> >> >> >>should just STFU about biofuel.
>>
>> >> >> > Why?
>>
>> >> >> > If you really want it to happen you would understand that
raising
>> >> >> > awareness is key.
>>
>> >> >> I didn't make my point clearly there.  I meant to say, the should
stop
>> >> >> criticizing biofuel research.  As in the old example of the IBM
executive
>> >> >> ridiculing the idea of a personal computer, criticizing research
never got
>> >> >> anything built.
>>
>> >> >We shouldn't be criticizing it. But I'm not so sure we should be
>> >> >subsidizing corn ethanol. That there, that's a scam.
>>
>> >> Nope.
>>
>> >> It's a transition until cellulosic and switchgrass gets going.
>>
>> >I'm all for it. Let's see if we can get more energy out than in. So
>> >far we can't, and thus our subsidies to ADM are merely .. a gift .. to
>> >ADM.
>>
>> Fool, if we do NOTHING the technology never EVOLVES!
>>
>> No infrastructure for production can be built without INVESTMENT!
>>
>> Why are you so fucking STUPID????
>
>Maybe because I know more about distillation than you do. Had a
>friend, and all that.

YOU FUCKING IDIOT!

The same tired act, again and again!

> It's currently expensive as hell, and it costs
>more to get a BTU out than a BTU is worth.

ONLY for basic CORN!

Toss in waste products and the economics changes immediately.

>There's no point in "transitioning" to ETOH until someone can make it
>work. So far, no one can. 

BULLSHIT!

>As soon as someone can, we'll "transition".
>That'll be fairly easy.
>
>Quit calling people names. 

DROP FUCKING DEAD YOU LYING PIECE OF MORONIC SHIT!

>Maybe folks will take you more seriously.
>That's just advice. Take it or leave it.

Do you truly think anyone but Homu, Shitzer and Gothman take you
seriously, do ya?

>> >> >The Brazilians can make it work.
>>
>> >> Cane sugar has a higher energy content. We need to plant sugar
beets.
>>
>> >And not subsidize them.
>>
>> Damn you are one stupid fucking OAF!
>>
>> The way to INSURE a replacement technology takes hold is to INCENT IT!
>
>I don't want corn ethanol to take hold.

Tough, E85 has already handled that, fool.

> It's expensive and
>environmentally heinous. It's wasteful. It's a pretend technology.

It's up and running, deal with it.

>Don't get me wrong -- I think people should experiment. But I don't
>want to fund their experiments in such an obviously wrong-headed
>endeavor.
>
>I've not been convinced that sugar beets are better. If they are, they
>should pay for themselves. If they aren't, they should go away.

You are so amazingly clot-headed.

It will take more than market forces to get us OFF imported oil.


>> Would you please, please buy a fucking economics textbook and READ the
>> damned thing!
>
>So far you haven't told me anything I don't already know. You haven't
>convinced me you've got any .. greater knowledge .. than I do. 

But that's because you're a total idiot.

You're just a total fucking JOKE of a person.

>Why
>don't you suggest a chapter for me to read. Be specific about what you
>think my deficiencies are that need corrected.

Try: "The hidden military cost of imported ME oil..."

>>
>> http://www.usda.gov/oce/EthanolSugarFeasibilityReport3.pdf
>>
>> The cost of converting sugar beets into ethanol was estimated to be
>> approximately $2.35 per gallon based on 2003-04 sugar beet market
>> prices and estimated sugar
>> beet processing costs. Feedstock cost was estimated at $1.58 per
>> gallon of ethanol produced,
>> representing 67 percent of the total ethanol production cost. These
>> estimates may understate the
>> relative profitability of converting sugarcane and sugar beets into
>> ethanol, compared with
>> processing sugarcane into raw sugar and sugar beets into refined
>> sugar, due to price increases for
>> raw and refined sugar in recent months following the hurricanes in
>> Florida and Louisiana in
>> 2005. While sugar production is expected to rebound in 2006/07, U.S.
>> sugar prices will likely
>> remain considerably above forfeiture levels.-
>
>Great. So if someone can already make money raising sugar beets for
>ethanol, why do we need to subsidize them?

Because it helps give the entire process a critical mass KICK START!

You MORON!

> In case the price of oil
>goes down? It's not going to.

None other than T. Boone Pickens is shorting oil now - think you're
even 1/1,000th as savvy as he?

http://www.cnbc.com/id/23272368

After correctly predicting oil's climb to more than $100 a barrel,
legendary oilman Boone Pickens said Thursday he is shorting both the
oil and natural gas markets in the belief that oil will stage a
short-term pullback. 


>And if it does, it's easy enough to revisit subsidies.

I find even seeing your posts a painful reminder of how amazingly
dull-witted so many people are.