Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    6:25 AM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: All Things Ethanol > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: Food versus Fuel Fallacies Back to Topics
gamechanger2011

Champion Author
Wichita

Posts:1,894
Points:72,615
Joined:Jun 2011
Message Posted: Jul 16, 2013 7:39:26 PM



"'Food versus Fuel' is a fallacy perpetuated by an orchestrated campaign against ethanol, that was financed by companies that seek to profit from high grocery store prices."

Food versus Fuel Fallacies
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,584
Points:1,415,110
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Jul 20, 2013 10:56:42 AM

Here is a quote form the acutal study not the PR piece Shockjock1961 is linking to.

"There are no official USDA estimates of distillers’ grains production or stocks, but export data are available. To estimate distillers’ grain feed use a standard yield of 17 pounds of 10 percent moisture distillers’ dried grains with solubles (DDGS) per bushel of corn used for fuel ethanol production was assumed. That production volume was then factored up to from 10 percent to 14 percent moisture, the standard for corn. That supply was assumed to substitute for corn on a 1:1 basis. That is, 56 pounds of 14 percent moisture DDGS was assumed to replace one bushel of corn. Exports were subtracted from production to obtain domestic supply. DDGS has no use other than feeding, and inventory data are not available, so the entire domestic supply was assumed to be fed in the year of production.
Even with the add-back of DDGS, total feed use of corn plus DDGS declined from about 6.6 billion bushels in 2005/2006, to an estimated 5.8 billion bushels in 2011/2012."

Nice assumptions backed by creative accounting to prove author's point. At the same time, the increased cost of transportation was not part of this study. Why is that?
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:24,218
Points:2,870,940
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Jul 20, 2013 10:42:39 AM

Study Supports Need To Reform Ethanol Production Mandate

"As a Senate Biofuels Investment and Renewable Fuels Standard Market Congressional Study Group examines several aspects of the RFS, the study will provide critical facts needed to reform the current standard. Among other results, the study found that because of the RFS:

Ethanol, because its energy cost is higher than gasoline and because of its negative effect on fuel mileage, added about $14.5 billion, or 10 cents a gallon, to motorists’ fuel costs in 2011.

Increased ethanol production since 2007 has had no effect on gasoline production or oil imports, contrary to supporters’ claims.

Corn used for ethanol production rose 300 percent from 2005 to 2011, increasing from 1.6 billion bushels to 5 billion. (Ethanol production now uses more than 40 percent of the U.S. annual corn supply.)

Corn now represents about 80 percent of the cost of producing ethanol compared with 40-50 percent before implementation of the mandate.
Corn prices jumped to more than $6 a bushel in 2011 from $2 in 2005.
The rate of change for the Consumer Price Index for meats, poultry, fish and eggs increased by 79 percent while it decreased by 41 percent for non-food items since the RFS was revised in 2007.

Ethanol production costs and ethanol prices have all but eliminated a market for ethanol blends higher than 10 percent.

The United States exported 1.2 billion gallons of ethanol in 2011.

In addition to the effects of the RFS, the study pointed out that on an energy basis, ethanol, which has only 67 percent of the net energy per gallon of gasoline, never has been priced competitively with gasoline. It also found that, contrary to supporters of the RFS, oil imports have declined not because of increased ethanol production but because of increased domestic crude oil production and higher refinery yields."
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,584
Points:1,415,110
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Jul 20, 2013 10:36:16 AM

Shockjock1961 comes up with another idiotic article where author is lacking knowledge on subjects like distillers grains, grass-fed beef, and the cost of transportation. Looks like the author is as big of the expert on the subject as is Shockjock1961.

[Edited by: krzysiek_ck at 7/20/2013 10:37:38 AM EST]
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:24,218
Points:2,870,940
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Jul 20, 2013 8:20:37 AM

As Drought Kills Corn, Farmers Fight Over Ethanol

"Farmers who raise America's cattle, hogs, and chickens never appreciated Washington's infatuation with biofuels — especially ethanol that's produced from corn. After all, when the government nudges more corn toward ethanol factories, it means that there's less available for animals. Last year, in fact, 40 percent of the country's corn harvest went to ethanol production.

In good years, when corn is plentiful and prices stay low, no one complains too much.

In bad years, though .... well, this morning, a coalition of groups representing America's livestock and chicken farmers delivered an angry attack on the "Renewable Fuel Standard," which requires gasoline companies to buy a minimum amount of ethanol — 13 billion gallons this year — and blend it into gasoline supplies. The groups released a new study that argues that this ethanol mandate does very little good: It increases the cost of gasoline and makes the country no less dependent on energy imports.

Even worse, the meat producers say, it creates unfair competition for corn. The mandate forces gasoline companies to buy billions of gallons of ethanol that they don't even want, driving corn prices through the ceiling and potentially forcing livestock producers into bankruptcy."
Profile Pic
gamechanger2011
Champion Author Wichita

Posts:1,894
Points:72,615
Joined:Jun 2011
Message Posted: Jul 19, 2013 8:25:46 AM

GrumpyCat...that's not so. In the area of Kansas that we live in there are probably more wheat fields, milo and soybeans then corn fields. There are also still plenty of farmers with cattle. The severe drought seriously depleted the cattle in our area last year though. Ponds completely dried up so there was little to no water for them.
Your argument isn't going to hold up! Try again!

[Edited by: gamechanger2011 at 7/19/2013 8:26:24 AM EST]
Profile Pic
GrumpyCat
Champion Author Alabama

Posts:5,653
Points:1,334,805
Joined:Jun 2009
Message Posted: Jul 19, 2013 12:34:09 AM

LIE: "Fact: Food's prices are a direct result of petroleum costs that have skyrocked."

Ask *any* farmer to what he attributes the rise in corn prices the past 20 years from $2 to $6/bushel.

Ask any farmer why he no longer plants anything but corn.

Ask any farmer why he no longer lets a field lie shallow a season, or rotate crops to replenish the soil.

Ask any farmer why he buys expensive fertilizer (made from natural gas).

Ask any politician from a corn state.

Drive through the countryside and observe how every square foot dominated by corn. Just for fun notice the corn fields surrounded by barbed wire fences. Corn doesn't need a fence, those are fields originally used for livestock.

The answer is that he can sell as much corn as he can raise, and unlike years past can get more for the corn than it cost to produce. Government price supports were typically 75% of production cost and many years one had to settle for the support price.

Land that once sold for $500 to $1000/acre can now produce $1000/year of corn.
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:24,218
Points:2,870,940
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Jul 18, 2013 5:30:13 PM

Yet more personal attacks FL? Sounds like a note of desperation on your part...
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,584
Points:1,415,110
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Jul 18, 2013 1:45:22 PM

ggg452 wrote: "I am not a multinational corporation nor do I represent anti-ethanol interest but I still believe that corn is for food and not fuel..."

Then feel free to grow your own sweet corn and do with it as you wish.
Profile Pic
FrankLee1
All-Star Author Minnesota

Posts:989
Points:39,480
Joined:Feb 2013
Message Posted: Jul 18, 2013 1:19:26 PM

It is disrespectful towards Einstein for the likes of shock to use his likeness.
Profile Pic
ggg452
Champion Author Manitoba

Posts:4,480
Points:1,021,695
Joined:May 2012
Message Posted: Jul 18, 2013 1:06:47 PM

I am not a multinational corporation nor do I represent anti-ethanol interest but I still believe that corn is for food and not fuel...
Profile Pic
Hannie59
All-Star Author Appleton

Posts:964
Points:24,300
Joined:Apr 2010
Message Posted: Jul 18, 2013 11:35:57 AM

LOL Shockjock. I can't stop laughing!!!!!!!!!!!!

A chicken website, a beef website and the HERITAGE FOUNDATION??? The heritage foundation is an appendage of the petroluem industry, don't you know that??????????

I don't know how someone could manage to accumulate a credibility below zero but you just did it.
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:24,218
Points:2,870,940
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Jul 18, 2013 11:25:11 AM

How the Ethanol Program is Driving Up Food Prices

Renewable Fuel Standard, Ethanol Use, and Corn Prices

"According to this line of reasoning, corn consumers need only what is in the DDGS. This argument, however, is quashed by the second fact: Over half of the corn crop goes to non-ethanol uses, which means that most corn consumers are willing to pay three times as much for the corn and its starch as they are to pay for just the non-starch components found in DDGS.
These two facts show that the starch is important for non-ethanol uses and that ethanol producers compete against the other users, driving up the price of corn by an estimated two-thirds"

Ethanol Mandate Drives Up Food Prices, Hurts Restaurants
Profile Pic
Hannie59
All-Star Author Appleton

Posts:964
Points:24,300
Joined:Apr 2010
Message Posted: Jul 18, 2013 10:53:36 AM

Lie: What GrumpyCat says.

Fact: Food's prices are a direct result of petroleum costs that have skyrocked. It's almost all in the transportational costs which are high because of oil's monopoly and their continued campaign against any viable alternatives. To which GrumpyCat's ignorance and others' continues to contribute to and propogate.

[Edited by: Hannie59 at 7/18/2013 10:56:19 AM EST]
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,584
Points:1,415,110
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Jul 18, 2013 10:08:26 AM

GrumpyCat wrote: "Fact: Food prices rose due to ethanol's demand for corn."

"3. Back up your arguments with facts. Where possible, facts should be supported by a link to a respected Internet source." - General Forum Guidelines
Profile Pic
GrumpyCat
Champion Author Alabama

Posts:5,653
Points:1,334,805
Joined:Jun 2009
Message Posted: Jul 18, 2013 10:06:55 AM

Fact: Food prices rose due to ethanol's demand for corn.

It doesn't matter if ethanol could be produced from something other than corn unless it can be produced on land not suitable for human food production.
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,584
Points:1,415,110
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Jul 17, 2013 3:59:41 PM

Half a sentence again Shocky, what are you trying to hide? Here is a full paragraph.

"FAO (2008) compared a baseline scenario, which assumes that biofuel production will double by 2018, to an assumption that biofuel production will remain at its 2007 levels; it concluded that in the latter case grain prices would be 12 percent lower, wheat prices 7 percent lower, and vegetable oil prices 15 percent lower than in the baseline scenario. OECD (2008) arrived at similar conclusions for vegetable oils, finding that their prices would be 16 percent lower than the baseline if biofuel support policies were abolished; eliminating biofuel subsidies would have smaller impacts on the prices of coarse grains (-7 percent) and wheat (-5 percent). Rosegrant (2008), who simulated market developments between 2000 and 2007 (excluding the surge in biofuel production), concluded that biofuel growth accounted for 30 percent of the food price increases seen in that period, with the contribution varying from 39 percent for maize to 21 percent for rice. Looking ahead, Rosegrant found that if biofuel production were to remain at its 2007 levels, rather than reaching its mandated level, maize prices would be lower by 14 percent in 2015 and by 6 percent in 2020."

[Edited by: krzysiek_ck at 7/17/2013 4:00:46 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:24,218
Points:2,870,940
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Jul 17, 2013 2:55:06 PM

From the (outdated) world bank statement listed as a source in GC's link:

"Rosegrant (2008), who simulated market developments between 2000 and 2007 (excluding the surge in biofuel production), concluded that biofuel growth accounted for 30 percent of the food price increases seen in that period"

And that was before the big biofuel push in 2008...
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,584
Points:1,415,110
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Jul 17, 2013 8:55:32 AM

borsht, The article you have provided fails, like you, to explain what exactly contributes to the higher feed costs. How is ethanol affecting the price of dairy hay? What about the transportation costs?

[Edited by: krzysiek_ck at 7/17/2013 8:56:22 AM EST]
Profile Pic
goldseeker
Champion Author West Virginia

Posts:23,327
Points:3,406,980
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jul 17, 2013 3:54:18 AM

Another worthless link sponsored by the oil industry. Dairy farmers around here do not complain about feed costs around here, and for good reason. Most raise their own feed. However they do complain about the high cost of fuel and fertilizer.

[Edited by: goldseeker at 7/17/2013 3:54:47 AM EST]
Profile Pic
borsht
Champion Author Oakland

Posts:3,584
Points:869,050
Joined:Aug 2012
Message Posted: Jul 17, 2013 3:09:03 AM

The ethanol lobby is just as big a liar, if not bigger than the oil lobby.
My wife grew a dairy farm. They sold grade a milk under contract with Safeway or others.
The biggest cost to them was energy and feed.
Here is an article from a current farmer explaining his position,
The farmer gets squeezed very hard. He is caught between the cost of feed from his coop and the price he gets form his buyer.

http://www.theprairiestar.com/news/dairy/dairy-farmers-cope-with-high-feed-costs/article_e35638c4-1510-5a27-abb3-857aa8c54b1a.html
Profile Pic
FrankLee1
All-Star Author Minnesota

Posts:989
Points:39,480
Joined:Feb 2013
Message Posted: Jul 17, 2013 1:17:00 AM

Thanks for the link. Sadly, I have found that people prefer to cling to their opinions based on ideology and feelings; logic and facts barely enter into the equation.
Profile Pic
WhiskeyBurner
Veteran Author Illinois

Posts:450
Points:15,855
Joined:May 2013
Message Posted: Jul 16, 2013 11:21:28 PM

True, but that kills the "Ethanol is bad, umkay" narrative that the petroleum industry has been working so hard at spreading.
Profile Pic
aRBy
All-Star Author Grand Rapids

Posts:592
Points:358,425
Joined:May 2005
Message Posted: Jul 16, 2013 10:46:26 PM

People are so stupid! If we're growing MORE corn for ethanol then we are producing MORE food since 1/3 of the corn goes to animal feed.

Post a reply Back to Topics