ad banner for Commie Obama
AdvertisingConservative GrapevineEmailFAQHomeForumRSSYouTubeTownhall
 
The home of America's Ambassador of Whoop@ss!



« The Daily Kos Vs. Military Recruiters | Main | The Website Of The Day Is Gateway Pundit »
April 09, 2008
John Hawkins Paul Krugman Gets It Right On Biofuels

I don't have a lot of respect for Paul Krugman and think he gets almost everything wrong, but this excerpt from his latest column proves that even a blind squirrel stumbles across a nut every once in a while,

"The subsidized conversion of crops into fuel was supposed to promote energy independence and help limit global warming. But this promise was, as Time magazine bluntly put it, a “scam.”

This is especially true of corn ethanol: even on optimistic estimates, producing a gallon of ethanol from corn uses most of the energy the gallon contains. But it turns out that even seemingly “good” biofuel policies, like Brazil’s use of ethanol from sugar cane, accelerate the pace of climate change by promoting deforestation.

And meanwhile, land used to grow biofuel feedstock is land not available to grow food, so subsidies to biofuels are a major factor in the food crisis. You might put it this way: people are starving in Africa so that American politicians can court votes in farm states."

There are biofuels that show some promise, but ethanol is not among them. Yet, we have politicians, both Democrats AND Republicans, relentlessly pushing this useless biofuel along with equally unproductive forms of "clean energy" like wind farms and solar power?

Why? Because it's the perfect political scam. These politicians get to funnel tax dollars to their supporters, who pay them back with donations, and as an added bonus, they get to claim that they're big supporters of the environment because they support biofuels, solar, and wind power.

Meanwhile, it's the much demonized oil, coal, and natural gas companies that power our economy and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future, barring some sort of unforeseen technological breakthrough.

Rate this article:

Rating: 4.0/5 (1 vote cast)

BlinklistBlogMarksdel.icio.usDiggFurlMagnoliaNewsvineRedditStumbleuponTechnorati
    Share this article!
John Hawkins | 05:16 AM | Permalink   Comments (15)   Trackbacks (0)

Note: Comments and Trackbacks for this entry closed on April 14, 2008 05:16 AM Most commented on recent posts
  AP: It's Racist to Mention Obama's Terrorist Ties (140 comments)
  Live Blogging The Vice Presidential Debate (138 comments)
  Obama Funny Business (136 comments)
  Liveblogging The Presidential Debate (129 comments)
  Ok, Not To Depress You, But... (75 comments)
  A Short Debate Analysis: The Winner Is... (71 comments)
  Barack Obama Was a Member of Radical Left New Party (71 comments)
  Who is Barack Obama, and what does he stand for? (60 comments)
  Q&A Friday #95 (58 comments)
  "In 100 Words Or Less: What's Wrong With The World?" (54 comments)

Highest rated recent posts
  So That's What Community Organizers Do [4.5 stars]
  Barack Obama In Quotes Version 3.0 [4.3 stars]
  The Law of Unintended Consequences Strikes Again [4.1 stars]
  Intellectualism & Sarah Palin: Or How The Smarty Pants Set Are Threatened By Someone Who Knows Sense [4.1 stars]
  Day By Day's Chris Muir Writes About......Me?! [3.9 stars]
  Video Of The Day: The Opening Of Idiocracy [3.9 stars]
  I Have 4 Words For You: "We Can't Afford It." [3.9 stars]
  A Short Debate Analysis Of The 2nd McCain Vs. Obama Debate. [3.9 stars]
  Naomi Wolf Is Blathering On About Fascism Again [3.8 stars]
  Q&A Friday #95: Why Are You Running Ads For Left-Wing Groups? [3.8 stars]
  Q&A Friday #95: If You Could Enact A Single Piece Of Legislation, What Would It Be? [3.8 stars]

ad banner for Survey
© Copyright 2001-2008 John Hawkins
eXTReMe Tracker