We've been doing interviews for several days.

Today we had a candidate who has a job in a biodiesel facility. I asked him why he was interested in our opening, since he'd have to relocate.

His reposnse, "Biodiesel isn't cost effective w/o gov't subsidies. My company closed two facilities when those subsidies ran out in Jan. I think they'll be more closings."

If biodiesel can't make it, I gotta think EtOH is even worse. It's immoral to tax profitable industries to subsidize unprofitable ones. We're killing ourselves.

Bio diesel, wind power, tidal power, solar cells etc. The impractical list keeps on getting longer, while nuclear power languishes on the green agenda.

What green energy (or industry, for that matter) ISN'T subsidized? I'm working on landfill gas-to-energy right now and we can't do it without subsidies from the power company. We've also looked at solar (landfills have lots of open space) but the numbers still don't work because we're non profit so we have to farm it out. That's right - it only works if you get the tax breaks!

We've got people clamoring for a green-based economy but I'd like someone to give me just a couple of examples of green industries that produce a non-subsidized ROI. I really would like to know if there are some out there.

There is one biofuel that can be produced in sufficient quantities to have a material impact, at a price that won't be prohibitive.

That fuel is ethanol from sugar cane, which is 4 times more efficient as a source than the corn we are currently using. The problem is that Iowa is the first stop on the presidential caucus/primary trail.

Brasil can produce ethanol for something on the order of 91 cents per gallon. It's not as powerful as gasoline, and your mileage will go down, but at that price it's worth it. 44 percent of the on-the-road fuel burned in Brasil is ethanol. Latin America could probably produce enough sugar cane, from fields that are largely dormant today, to meet 20 to 30 percent of our gasoline needs. A big part of that number is Cuba, which would require normalization of relations, but that's long overdue.

Sure we would still be importing. But we would have some elasticity in the system by being able to trade off oil versus sugar, and that would give us far more cushion against price spikes than we can ever have in the current structure. We would also be creating green jobs in Latin America, and is there anyone who doesn't think that givng Latin America a new cash crop would be a huge help for our immigration and drug issues?

(04-12-2010 11:12 AM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  What green energy (or industry, for that matter) ISN'T subsidized? I'm working on landfill gas-to-energy right now and we can't do it without subsidies from the power company. We've also looked at solar (landfills have lots of open space) but the numbers still don't work because we're non profit so we have to farm it out. That's right - it only works if you get the tax breaks!

We've got people clamoring for a green-based economy but I'd like someone to give me just a couple of examples of green industries that produce a non-subsidized ROI. I really would like to know if there are some out there.

It appears that the organic foods industry is profitable & doesn't get any more subsidies than regular farmers. Which, of course, is part of the problem. Try finding an industry that isn't subsidized. Oil & nuclear are both subsidized, heck even coal is subsidized.

(04-12-2010 12:03 PM)jh Wrote:  

(04-12-2010 11:12 AM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  What green energy (or industry, for that matter) ISN'T subsidized? I'm working on landfill gas-to-energy right now and we can't do it without subsidies from the power company. We've also looked at solar (landfills have lots of open space) but the numbers still don't work because we're non profit so we have to farm it out. That's right - it only works if you get the tax breaks!

We've got people clamoring for a green-based economy but I'd like someone to give me just a couple of examples of green industries that produce a non-subsidized ROI. I really would like to know if there are some out there.

It appears that the organic foods industry is profitable & doesn't get any more subsidies than regular farmers. Which, of course, is part of the problem. Try finding an industry that isn't subsidized. Oil & nuclear are both subsidized, heck even coal is subsidized.

Great point.

(04-12-2010 10:48 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  We've been doing interviews for several days.

Today we had a candidate who has a job in a biodiesel facility. I asked him why he was interested in our opening, since he'd have to relocate.

His reposnse, "Biodiesel isn't cost effective w/o gov't subsidies. My company closed two facilities when those subsidies ran out in Jan. I think they'll be more closings."

If biodiesel can't make it, I gotta think EtOH is even worse. It's immoral to tax profitable industries to subsidize unprofitable ones. We're killing ourselves.

Are you sure(if this person actually exists) that this person wants you to repeat what he said in a message board? Shouldn't it be kept private? Doesn't seem very ethical. Btw, any chance you will be one of those killing yourself? Oh wait. That is a sin and you won't meet the man in the sky when you die. Damn. We never get good news from you.

With just a few exceptions, the word "subsidies" is rarely attributed to a feel-good success story.

Was just reading an article last week about how industrial nations spend billions of subsidies on an inefficient fishing industry, resulting in over-fishing, fish discarding, etc.

When you artificially meddle too much with supply and demand, not much good can come out of it.

(04-12-2010 12:03 PM)jh Wrote:  

(04-12-2010 11:12 AM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  What green energy (or industry, for that matter) ISN'T subsidized? I'm working on landfill gas-to-energy right now and we can't do it without subsidies from the power company. We've also looked at solar (landfills have lots of open space) but the numbers still don't work because we're non profit so we have to farm it out. That's right - it only works if you get the tax breaks!
We've got people clamoring for a green-based economy but I'd like someone to give me just a couple of examples of green industries that produce a non-subsidized ROI. I really would like to know if there are some out there.

It appears that the organic foods industry is profitable & doesn't get any more subsidies than regular farmers. Which, of course, is part of the problem. Try finding an industry that isn't subsidized. Oil & nuclear are both subsidized, heck even coal is subsidized.

Yes, this is why it is improper to call what we have capitalism.

More than anything it is corporatism, arguably closer to fascism with its corporate state than any of the other main lines of economic thinking (capitalism, socialism, communism). And with what's happened with the banks and car companies, under both Shrub and Obama, we are getting closer to fascism all the time.

If the subsidies attributable to oil (mostly placed there under democrat presidents, FWIW) and coal (also mostly arisng under democrats, to placate their UMW constituency) were removed, alternatives would be much more competitive. That's why a carbon tax or cap-and-trade doesn't really bother me that much--as long as they are offset by tax relief elsewhere, in order to be revenue-neutral or nearly so. Otherwise, they would stifle the economy too much, and unfortunately this administration and congress seem to be approaching this from the "otherwise" direction.

Pure supply-and-demand doesn't really work best for oil or coal because of the subsidies and the externalities (pollution, war in Mideast, etc.). Get those things adequately priced in the system, and supply-and-demand would take care of the problem quite nicely, thank you. Way more nicely than any governement program or bureaucrat.

(04-12-2010 11:53 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  There is one biofuel that can be produced in sufficient quantities to have a material impact, at a price that won't be prohibitive.

That fuel is ethanol from sugar cane, which is 4 times more efficient as a source than the corn we are currently using. The problem is that Iowa is the first stop on the presidential caucus/primary trail.

Brasil can produce ethanol for something on the order of 91 cents per gallon. It's not as powerful as gasoline, and your mileage will go down, but at that price it's worth it. 44 percent of the on-the-road fuel burned in Brasil is ethanol. Latin America could probably produce enough sugar cane, from fields that are largely dormant today, to meet 20 to 30 percent of our gasoline needs. A big part of that number is Cuba, which would require normalization of relations, but that's long overdue.

Sure we would still be importing. But we would have some elasticity in the system by being able to trade off oil versus sugar, and that would give us far more cushion against price spikes than we can ever have in the current structure. We would also be creating green jobs in Latin America, and is there anyone who doesn't think that givng Latin America a new cash crop would be a huge help for our immigration and drug issues?

I agree and have said similar... especially in that sugar doesn't take long to germinate... If a country or countries started trying to abuse their power, we could just cancel our contracts and sign a new one with another poor country... or grow it here.

Northern Mexican States, Central and SOuth America, Caribbean Island nations, including Haiti. instead of just giving them money and hope they spend it wisely, what if we gave them a 10 yr sugar ethanol contract?? There may even be some alternatives for African nations, but we are making a mistake if we don't take advantage of such an easily grown crop that can be used in our existing engines with little or no modification.