Posted by
rycK on Monday, April 07, 2008 9:20:49 AM
The Leftists Bawl for Grain-Based Fuels and the Prices Rise and they Bawl About the Prices.
There are numerous mental afflictions that haunt our society, but none more difficult to deal with than liberalism and its many self-inflicted backlashes. The drooling leftists in a constant state of despair over the rising carbon dioxide levels that will kill us all and force us into cannibalism according to Ted Turner have demanded fuels based on crops instead of fossil remains. For the simple minded, this looks like a great opportunity to fix a non problem at high cost and get the government involved in the details. A series of woeful glubberances[1] were presented to the world to make grains into alcohol to fuel our cars.
It would seem that a simple inspection of the laws of supply and demand might have guessed this would happen, but the tears and blubbering and sobs drowned out reason and market forces and now we have food shortages and high food prices. The slitherants who proffer these phony edicts and assessments then bawl over the economic backlash as we read in, as usual, the New York Times, the Walter Duranty [2]Paper.
In an article entitled Grains Gone Wild[3], the Times’ noisiest non-economist waxes economic for our amusement.
“Over the past few years the prices of wheat, corn, rice and other basic foodstuffs have doubled or tripled, with much of the increase taking place just in the last few months. High food prices dismay even relatively well-off Americans — but they’re truly devastating in poor countries, where food often accounts for more than half a family’s spending.” [All quotes here have my emphasis and refer to the article Grains Gone Wild unless othwise indicated.]
Why did this happen?
“How did this happen? The answer is a combination of long-term trends, bad luck — and bad policy.”[4]
Bad policy?
“First, there’s the march of the meat-eating Chinese… Second, there’s the price of oil… Third, there has been a run of bad weather in key growing areas.”
“Where the effects of bad policy are clearest, however, is in the rise of demon ethanol and other biofuels.”
“Oh, and in case you’re wondering: all the remaining presidential contenders are terrible on this issue.”
Even Obama?
“We also need a pushback against biofuels, which turn out to have been a terrible mistake.
But it’s not clear how much can be done. Cheap food, like cheap oil, may be a thing of the past.”
But, didn’t the NYT and other notables such as Ted Turner and Sir Richard Branson endorse such plans with pomp and circumstance and the approval of Bill Clinton?[5] [6]
“Ted Turner, one of the progenitors of 10-figure philanthropy with his $1 billion pledge to the United Nations in 1997, called Sir Richard’s plan a “brilliant move,” both as an investment and as a way to protect the global environment.”[7]
Didn’t somebody make the necessary [ very simple and elementary] calculations before and assess the reali9ty of this move and publish it in the New York Times?
Why, yes, here it is:
ҦOne acre of soybeans can produce 50 gallons of biodiesel fuel.
¶There are 427 million arable acres in the United States.
¶The average American driver uses 464 gallons of gasoline a year and there are 198 million drivers in the United States.
All of which means:
¶"Arable acres needed to make enough biodiesel: 1.8 billion."[8]
Is this effort actually the reverse of what the EcoNazis want? [9]
All this was obvious, but the political thrusts frequently transcend reason and produce the opposite result as we saw in the Great Society, busing, increased spending in ‘education’ and other foibles.
Duh?!
So, our non-economist in a krugmaniacal burst of illogic tells us:
“But it’s not clear how much can be done. Cheap food, like cheap oil, may be a thing of the past.”
How about drilling and producing more oil, since the phony Global Warming is a joke and there is no evidence burning fossil fuels contribute to any adverse effects on this globe??
Oh! We have to be politically correct even if food prices soar and the cost of biofuels will be 50% or more higher than ordinary gasoline an diesel!!
We can always depend on the New York Times to offer us the worst possible paths forward in any economic or social problems. Here is the current proof.
We can now have both expensive food and expensive auto fuels. That is wonderful, indeed. Let us all thank the drooling lefties who conjured up this mess.
rycK
Comments to: ryckki@gmail.com
[1]New word: a sorrowful plea to use somebody else’s money for a worthless social project. Glubberances are generally submitted by slitherants, another new word.
[2] Colors are used for emphasis in my blogs with bold an italics to match the particular political flavor of the comment or history of the reference. Duranty was a liar and Communist stooge and is an icon of the New York Times.
[4] Grains Gone Wild Ibid.
[5]Branson Pledges to Finance Clean Fuels Published: September 22, 2006 http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/22/business/22climate.html?scp=3&sq=bio+fuels&st=nyt
[6] http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/02/science/02tropic.html?scp=4&sq=bio+fuels&st=nyt
[7] Branson Pledges to Finance Clean Fuels Ibid.
[8] How Many Miles to the Bushel? y PAUL B. BROWN published: May 27, 2006 http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/27/business/media/27offline.html?scp=5&sq=bio+fuels&st=nyt
[9] http://media.cleantech.com/2425/petro-firms-applaud-new-study-damning-biofuels