Monday, May 12, 2008

  • Crime and Ethanol (A Must Read)

    Biofuels are one of the major reasons you and I are paying more for groceries these days. For most of us, it is just an inconvenience. For many around the world, however, it is a catastrophe. Last week, United Nations Special Investigator Jean Ziegler called the use of biofuels, such as ethanol, a “crime against a great part of humanity.” In the past, global food crises were sparked by natural disasters and bad harvests. What makes this food crisis a crime against humanity is: We caused it. And like many man-made problems, this one can be traced to our false worldview.

    Here in the United States, egg prices are up 35 percent; milk up 23 percent; and bread up 16. For most Americans, who on average spend 10 percent of their income on food, these increases squeeze our budgets. But for the “great part of humanity” Ziegler talks about, it is a lot worse. In countries like Ethiopia and Bangladesh, people can spend 70 percent of their income on food; so even modest increases in food prices can impair their ability to feed their families. And price increases for the staples they depend on have not been modest: Wheat prices have doubled and corn prices quadrupled in the last year. Rising food prices are causing social instability. According to the World Food Program, “33 countries in Asia and Africa face political instability as the urban poor struggle to feed their families”—which is why the president and Congress are talking now about increasing aid to these countries.

    While the rise in food-staple prices has many causes, as Ziegler noted, one of them is definitely man-made: the use of cropland and food-staples to produce bio-fuels such as ethanol. He called “transforming hundreds and hundreds of thousands of tons” of foodstuffs into fuel “absolutely catastrophic for the hungry people.”

    Look at it this way: It takes 510 pounds of corn to make 13 gallons of ethanol—that amount could “feed a child in Zambia or Mexico for a year,” while it fuels your car only for a week!

    Ziegler is not alone; the IMF (International Monetary Fund) has raised grave concerns, and Secretary of State Rice recently spoke of the “unintended consequence from the alternative fuels’ effort.” What is maddening about this is that the biofuel effort is fueled by politicians handing out massive subsidies to the farm belt and pandering to glassy-eyed environmentalists. Every presidential hopeful who participated in the Iowa caucuses had to sing the praises of ethanol. That is why John McCain stayed away, because he opposes the subsidies.

    Now, I am all for farmers making money on their crops. They deserve it. But no politician with a shred of integrity can deny that it is more important to feed a child in Zambia for a year than to feed your car for a week. And—as if I need to remind you—this is an election year, so ask your candidates where they stand on this tragic political folly. And call your members of Congress to tell them how you feel.

    A properly informed worldview is the key here. Two non-Christian worldviews have merged to bring about this crisis: one that sees maintaining political power as an end in itself, and one that sees the environment as our chief concern, even at the expense of humans. We Christians insist on the proper use of government: that is, to restrain evil and promote justice. And we believe in proper environmental stewardship. But we insist that people, especially the poor, must come first.

    --Chuck Colson on Breakpoint

    These are other recent Breakpoint commentaries from last week I feel are a must-read...

    The Divorce Generation
    Writing Love On Their Arms
    Radical Rantings

    Acts 10:5 "The angel answered, 'Your prayers and gifts to the poor have come up as a memorial offering before God.'..."

Comments (15)

  • delicatewing

    Corn is the least effecient use of bioethanol - why do we use it instead of sugar beets?  Because of the lobbiests and politically active famers - more money if you have to use more crops.


    Also, we're going to start seeing a HUGE rise in the price of groceries because of the wheat blight in India.  Scary stuff man.

  • JersWife

    "Look at it this way: It takes 510 pounds of corn to make 13 gallons of ethanol—that amount could “feed a child in Zambia or Mexico for a year,” while it fuels your car only for a week!"


    I'd heard on Glenn Beck about how this was causing a world food shortage, but I'd never heard this statistic before.  that's horrible! 

  • Mr_Mann8204
  • Sophiabeene

    Hey! good post! I've been thinking that I wish we would use ethenol or go to it at least but I didn't realize the cost to poverty. I'm glad you posted this so that I wasn't ignorant to the downfalls of ethenol usage...yikes!


    thanks for the mother's day comment. Better late than never =)

  • gabrielpeter

    @Sophiabeene - In addition, the ethanol prices at the pump might be cheaper, but it also burns faster.  So if you were thinking about switching to save money, it wouldn't help you anyway.

  • the_amie

    Interesting post.
    I like that profle picture.

  • EsotericTheaterLover

    Yeah, none of the candidates has a coherent energy policy.  Ethanol is a bad idea, but we have to find an alternative to oil.  But while we research it we MUST produce and refine more domestic oil and the use of food for fuel is not an acceptable alternative (especially at the efficiency of Ethanol).

    Mike

  • ElijahDH

    @Mike:
    "Ethanol is a bad idea, but we have to find an alternative to oil."

    Isn't that a pretty substantial assumption?  I've never seen any facts proving that we're in danger of running out of oil.  There are untapped oil fields all over the place, but there's just too much red-tape (and think-green hype) for anyone to pursue them. 

    I mean, I'm all for decreasing pollution and finding more energy efficient sources, but there's honestly not any impending disaster if we simply keep using oil until it's gone (which won't be for scores of generations from now).

  • EsotericTheaterLover

    @ElijahDH

    All the independent third party information I have seen says that we have anywhere from 75-100 years of oil left in the Earth (counting all the known fields, as well as anticipating at least a 50% increase because of undiscovered oil fields) at current consumption levels.  This also assumes that we have no eco consciousness whatsoever and just strip mine for oil.  So, considering that China is unlikely to continue at their present consumption and without even considering another third world country rising up to industrial status.  This also does not consider the economic impacts of dependence on foreign oil (which can be temporarily overcome with the use of domestic oil, but not for long) and the environmental impacts (I am not an alarmist, but Global Warming is real, I am not sure how much of a "problem" it is as far as the destruction of mankind, but it is certainly an issue, I am more worried about air pollution, which because of my heart is a keen problem for me and one that I can assure you is not "made up" by the liberal left).

    While disaster might not be the right word, it is certainly a problem.  We certainly do not have scores of generations until our oil supply runs out.  If we make it two generations down the road we will be extremely fortunate.

    We must begin to extract and process more oil, but we also must pour significant resources (perhaps part of Exxon/Mobil's $11 billion net profit) into finding a viable alternative energy source (for industrial, commercial, residential, and personal use).

    Mike

    PS  This is a good conversation and one that needs to be had between those on the left and on the right.  Both have great points and things that are terribly wrong with their views and it is only together that we can address this problem.

  • ElijahDH

    Mike- I'm not convinced, but don't take it personally; I'm hard to sway.  :)

    I'll admit my "scores of generations" remark was whimsical and not directly supported by any particular source, but do you have a source link for your 75-100 year estimation, or at least the name of the third-party research organization?

    I found this article, and this article to have entertaining and well-founded view on the subject.

  • gabrielpeter

    @EsotericTheaterLover - 
    @ElijahDH - 

    Hey, just to kind of chime in here while y'all are discussing...  If you click "reply" under a person's comment, it will create that little @ tag.  When they log on to Xanga, it will come up in their message updates that their comment on someone else's blog has been replied to.  Just a little trick of the trade someone pointed out to me *hehe*.  Carry on!

  • EsotericTheaterLover

    @ElijahDH - @gabrielpeter - 

    Hey thanks Gabe, nice tip!  I thought that it would only send a PM when you hit reply and not post the reply here.

    As far as links Elijah, I don't see how people always have these links handy like that.  I read something, process it, and file it away in my head.  Do you just copy and paste links of good articles into a txt file somewhere?  How do you organize it?

    But I would say that Edumnds.com, I know Stanford published some good studies on the subject, so did the UT departments of geology and chemical and petrolium engineering, the USGS publishes some good papers, as does the USEIA.  There have been some good articles in Popular Science, Forbes, and The CSM.

    But as far as specific links?  Nope, I've got none that would be considered "third party" (which I would say that 99% of websites information should be looked on with suspicion anyway, as they all have agendas of one sort or another).

    Mike

  • ElijahDH

    @gabrielpeter - heh, yep, thanks :)
    @EsotericTheaterLover - From the sound of it, I probably process things similarly to the way you do.  Usually, though, I make a point of remembering one or too summarizing phrases from an online article as near to word-for-word as I can when I file it in my head.  That way, should the need to find it again later arise, I have at least a starting point of words/phrases to Google.

    And yeah...being an avid Googler does help out.  I've got Google Desktop and Search Bar installed, and they work together to bring previously viewed websites nearer to the front of web searches to aid in finding previously viewed material. 

  • EsotericTheaterLover

    @ElijahDH - 

    Yeah, I guess my debate background kind of made me lazy.  We always had our evidence cut out and in a tub waiting for us.  Of course you can't go through life dragging hundreds of plastic tubs around with you I suppose.

    I know generally where I find information because I tend to go to the source rather than intermediate sources.  I don't trust their agendas.  I would rather go to where they get their facts from and sort it out myself.

    Like I said, from what I have read at current consumption levels and with estimated undiscovered oil, there will not be a crisis for some time.  But I doubt we continue at current consumption levels and I am not totally convinced that there is as much oil out there as some of the Oil Company think tanks say.  But even if we say that there is 150 or so years of oil taking into account all factors, I still think that deserves maybe not the crisis level, but something that deserves our attention.  Of course that doesn't take into account the environmental impact.

    I am far from an alarmist, but I think reasonable people can come to the conclusion that we need to start taking steps now to find a viable alternative energy source.  Plus it is not like the industry is hurting for money to take the necessary steps.  But it is also on consumers to make lifestyle changes that will make oil less profitable and push them to discover new sources.

    Mike

  • TwilightWrought

    I know I'm jumping into this a little late, but does anyone happen to know of any gas stations that don't use ethanol? The past three times I've stopped at a station to fill up, it had that beautiful "think green" "this pump contains at most 10% ethanol" sticker that I've been trying at all costs to avoid.

  • Choose Identity

  • Give eProps (?)

  • New! You can now edit your comments for 15 minutes after submitting.

Who recommended?