Study Shows Ethanol Produces Worse 'Global Warming' Pollution Than Gasoline

[Original_Intent]

this study doesn't say it's a worse pollutant. Pollution is not measured by CO2 emissions.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has declared that carbon dioxide is a pollutant.

EPA's declaration of carbon dioxide (CO2) as a pollutant makes every animate being on earth -- not the least of which are humans -- a long-term polluter.

Please Google "Is CO2 a pollutant?" Now I disagree with them and agree with you that it isn't a pollutant, however, technically it is now measured as one.

 

[Christopher A. Brown]

Sure it does. As soon as we start to run out, prices will rise. When that happens other forms of energy will emerge. But governments subsidizing inefficient methods of energy production is.....inefficient.

That other forms of energy will emerge is a "Popular Science" wet dream, the elite hope we will have while draining our economy pandering to our wants and desires.

What is inefficient economically is to think all forms can have equal efficiency. Why? Because time passes and energy is not captured and used, which is needed, while everyone waits for the ultimate dream energy. Also in that time we could have been learning new social norms of conservation instead of hoping hijacked science is going to develop the dream source.

No. I'm still waiting for a good battery while hoping the wealthy will stop lighting their trees as suv's half empty go to football games each weekend like Pavlovian boot lickers. Do you realize what children learn from all that?

I agree with supply and demand effects, but also realize the average American middle class family uses about 50% more energy than it needs and most of that is unnecessary travel. Big box stores and centralization are a very bad behavior, almost the opposite of what we need.

Really, it all comes down to behaviors. But do you see any serious work ANYWHERE trying to help people develop ways to change those. Noooooooo. You see the opposite on media. We have a lot to learn about ourselves.

 

[Weston White]

The Top Four Craziest Ethanol Quotes:

“I’m bi-warming. I warm here and I warm there. Now what? If I’m polluting, aren’t there moments where a cornstalk like crashes in the corner like, ‘Oh my God, it's all Ethanol’s fault!’ Shut up! Shut up! Stop! Move forward.”

“I’m tired of pretending I’m not special. I'm tired of pretending I'm not a total bitchin’ cornstalk from Mars. People can’t figure me out. They can't process me. I don't expect them to. You can't process me with a normal biofuel.”

“I’m sorry, man, but I've got magic. I've got poetry in my cornstalks. Most of the time -- and this includes naps -- I'm Ethanol, bro. And I will destroy you in the air. I will deploy my greenhouse gases to the ground.”

“I am on a drug. It's called Ethanol. It’s not available because if you try it once you will die. Your face will melt off and your children will weep over your globally warmed body. It’s too much.”

 

[Christopher A. Brown]

Hemp and sugarbeats produce much more energy than corn. Plus you can grow hemp just about anywhere its a fuggin giant weed for fucs sake.

I'm calling BS on that "news article"

Good point. Some states are getting proactive too. We should not forget the conspiracy that was foisted upon America to remove hemp from agriculture.
Sugar beets place a heavy load on soil nutrient, but it is a fact about the quantity of alcohol.

 

[Weston White]

CO2 is as much a pollutant as are renewable resources (e.g., recyclables); all exist as convertible, reusable resources—so long as ecological balance is maintained through social responsibility. CO2 is merely expended clean air that contains depleted oxygen molecules. CO is the greater danger as the byproduct of mechanically powered equipment, coal, earthly degassing (i.e., volcanic and tectonic activity), etc.

 

[Christopher A. Brown]

Using fossil fuel for energy isn't "destroying vital elements." It's maximizing efficiency. And apparently your instincts are different than mine, so the word "our" isn't quite right.

I guess you do not live in an area with highways clogged with traffic. My area is and creeks have no total dissolved oxygen meaning frogs are gone, fish are gone, birds are gone and only wells produce potable water.

With fracking gas wells, that could be gone too. Fracking of Petroleum wells too. I do however recognize a certain amount of oil can be burned without harm.

Back to the conservation issue.

 

[angelatc]

That other forms of energy will emerge is a "Popular Science" wet dream, the elite hope we will have while draining our economy pandering to our wants and desires.

No it isn't. It's how free markets work. The only thing that is "draining our economy" is the government intervention in the flow of resources. Our ancestors explored wind, water and solar energy sources but abandoned them because fossil fuels were far more efficient. That hasn't changed.

The only "wet dream" in this thread is the pretentious pretending that those archaic methods, abandoned by people with more common sense than money, are somehow feasible and economical now. They aren't.

 

[angelatc]

I guess you do not live in an area with highways clogged with traffic. My area is and creeks have no total dissolved oxygen meaning frogs are gone, fish are gone, birds are gone and only wells produce potable water.

All as a result of liberal policies, no doubt. So you live in a place that stacked people on top of people, sucked all the resources out of the environment and now feel that gives you the right to dictate policies in the parts of the nation that have managed to find the balance that eluded yours.

With fracking gas wells, that could be gone too. Fracking of Petroleum wells too. I do however recognize a certain amount of oil can be burned without harm.

Back to the conservation issue.

Oh, you're opposed to fracking too? Imagine that. http://bigstory.ap.org/article/experts-some-fracking-critics-use-bad-science