ethanol

In conjuncture with my previous post about McCain's new car battery contest, this post deals with a possible choice of a new fuel source.

This article reports on the stance on ethanol by the two candidates. The article also details some ethanol pros and cons.

Here is an article by The NY Times on Obama's ties to the ethanol industry.

Just by reading this Times article, it's easy to come to the conclusion that setting up ethanol as the new fuel source is setting up a new industry to buy political candidates and influence. In realistic terms, this is a practice that isn't going to go away. You can't run for president, for congress, or as a senator or any other public office without money. Campaigning costs money.

Setting up a new business like ethanol is going to upset a lot of other businesses.

Ok, ok, mainly one.

Speculators would say that either the car companies will drag their feet creating a new kind of engine (and then selling the cars that would run on ethanol) OR car companies would break away from oil companies and embrace the new power player.

The Daily Green article mentions something interesting. Even though ethanol costs more to produce than gas, and will eat up our crops and all that, it also might be a necessary step to move in the right direction. Leapfrogging technology happens all the time. Albeit with things that are substantially less costly than cars.

Imagine, on a smaller scale, software that gets advanced, generation after generation. It moves platforms, it fixes bugs... the auto industry has been under little burden to improve their engines. The laws imposed on the industry for cars to run more efficiently are a joke.

With advances in fuel economy, options, and emissions, who knows what might happen. But one thing is certain.

See, what Obama says he wants a new fuel source, to take the money we're spending out of the middle east. He's going to get a lot of support for that from voters.

The problem is, the corn industry in the US can't possibly supply us with the demand we'll need. We can't sustain that type of output, it just won't be possible. We can't get both crops and a fuel source out of our farm land without terrorizing the environment. And I don't think that's a compromise the Americans are willing to make. That means we'll have to go to countries like Brazil or China for ethanol, both of which have been using it as a fuel source, successfully.

I'm in no way shape or form throwing support to ethanol. From what I've read, it's not the best way for us to move forward, but it would be a move forward, slowly releasing us from the grip of oil. Creating new engines to run on other forms of fuel will only lead to the evolution of engines.

But if half of the bullet points The Daily Green has listed are true... sheesh. That's like taking a gun away from someone and giving them a another gun.

I need more information. But the signs of political pitfalls are there. Perhaps setting up a new industry, to take away from one that's been raping the citizens of all countries, on top of the planet, won't be such a bad thing.

Of course, they can do the same thing, if not properly regulated.

Boy, we're just doomed to repeat ourselves, aren't we...

(so this is what flip-flopping is like...)