Sugar Sugar

For some time I've mulled around the theory that the US could be energy dependent of foreign oil if we truly wanted to be. I concluded since we're not, perhaps it's no more than the oil boys, stockholders, investors, government and related businesses who prefer another century to drain the last blood soaked dime from oil before announcing with great fanfare and accolade, that they have a renewable cheap, clean, easy energy substitute for us. Of course such fuel would not be cheap after its initial introduction and we the taxpayers would certainly subsidize it for eternity, as with all things corporate, but we would at least not be sent to kill and die in oil wars.

The heartland recently opened or are in the process of constructing ethanol plants – lots of them, giving me more reason to suspect we're heading toward such fuel eventually. God knows with EPA's shoddy oversight what such production will do to the environment or our lungs but at least we would not be sent to kill and die in oil wars.

Then, a couple of nights ago I caught a few minutes of a tv clip on Brazil's energy independence which sent me to googling, In the '70s and '80s Brazil began a 100 percent ethanol push. During the '70s crisis they were importing 90 percent of their petroleum consumption. Today Brazil is almost energy independent of foreign oil. What they do import is predominantly for diesel fuel in trucking.

If Brazil can do it, why can't the US? I came across this article at Bloomberg by John Berry, naysaying the US using ethanol on a grand scale. He cites a variety of problems (excuses) although they appear solvable to me. And apparently Bush's promise of alternative fuel is no more than the underhanded BushCo method of subsidizing corn farmers.

Berry also cites this reason : "One big problem with ethanol is that it is more corrosive than gasoline. Gasoline stations need special equipment and tanks."

Question for Mr. Berry: Duh, how many gas stations can we specially equip with the billions spent on Iraq? And at least we would not be sent to kill and die for oil.

He also points out that "… it takes a lot of energy to grow and transport the corn, the main ingredient of ethanol, and to turn it into a liquid fuel. The latest studies indicate the process consumes about 80 percent as much energy as it produces, though that figure depends on a variety of assumptions such as corn yields and the location of ethanol plants relative to the corn fields."

Okay, let's ask Brazil how they made it feasible. And as for studies, who funded the studies, big oil? Of course the "figure" depends on yields and location. And does he not know better than to make an ass out of umptions? Brazil does it all with sugarcane, much more perishable than corn.

"One hectare of sugarcane can yield 80 metric tons of cane after the leaves are stripped by machete-wielding workers. However, the cane, which is a perennial that takes 18 months to mature, is perishable and must be processed within 24 hours. After crushing the stems and fermenting the cane juice, about 6,400 liters (1,664 gallons) of hydrated ethanol is captured. The fibrous pulp by-product, called bagasse, is piled and either burned for steam-powered electricity generators for the ethanol plants or returned to farmers and applied to the land. The Brazilian ethanol plants are completely energy self-sufficient."

Berry then whines of what ethanol in Brazil has done to the price of sugar : "So much of Brazil's sugar cane is being used for ethanol that the world sugar price has reached a 24-year high of more than 19 cents a pound. The world price used to be only about 40 percent of the price of U.S. produced sugar, which is protected by import quotas. The world price now is up to about 75 percent of the U.S. price." Berry might want to check the effects Clinton, NAFTA, and recent farm bills from congress had on sugar pricing too. (I'm so old I remember what Fidel's revolution did to the price of sugar.)

Berry ends with : "For purposes of improving national security, ethanol is at best a bit player."

Ties national security in nicely with oil. And I'm sure that's the way many many investors and government want it.