They know what they’re trying to engineer. I don’t believe they will succeed on this front at all, but they definitely have their goals, which is to engineer a food crisis.
There’s more than enough supplies for everyone. We have an abundance of goods and resources. But they’ve been trying to hide them, destroy them, and suppress them in order to cause this food crisis.
It’s why The Mad Pedo extended the Ethanol rule today. He wants corn being burned in fuel, instead of being used as calories to feed humans. He’d literally rather it be lost in a gunky petrochemical slurry he can hyperinflate beyond the means of the average American, instead of it going into food.
There’s nothing more that The Mad Pedo (and the Shadow President) behind him would like better than to pin gas at 10 dollars a gallon or more, and have bare shelves for the masses.
April 12, 2022
Posted on Gab
[Heavy sigh⦠This is probably not true.
On the farm we never raised any corn other than a little bit in the garden for our own use. Yet, I knew there was only a very minor chance of the expressed hypothesis being correct. A few seconds with a search engine confirmed my suspicion.
The variety of corn used to produce ethanol is not going to be something humans normally eat directly. According to this βYellow Dent Corn (Field Corn)β is used for ethanol and livestock feed. The Field Corn will remain in the field until the kernels are dry and hard (think popcorn dry and hard). Before being feed to livestock it is rolled or cracked. Field corn isΒ also used for corn meal, corn oil, and corn syrup.
The corn you find on your dining room table, fresh on the cob, creamed corn, or on the salad bar is βSweet Cornβ.
Sweet Corn is harvested when the kernels are soft and not ripe in the sense that the kernels are not mature enough to germinate (the kernels are in the βmilk stageβ) if they were planted.
Beyond the above, the equipment for harvesting and processing sweet corn is completely different from that used to process field corn. Sweet corn producers are not going to switch to field corn on a whim for a one year chance of selling into the expanded ethanol market. The return on investment for the new equipment for a single crop year would negate the potential for increased prices of field corn.
Ethanol producers may not have excess capacity to utilize the increased market size. Does anyone know? I suspect the unexpected increase in the market size cannot be fully exploited. This will reduce the impact to the food uses of field corn.
The gasoline producers have to purchase the corn on the open market. If the food usage of field corn is in short supply people will pay higher prices to compete with the ethanol producers. The market will balance the tradeoff between higher gasoline prices/shortages and higher food prices/shortages.
Another point to be made is that at this point the farmers and seed provides have already committed themselves for this yearβs crops. I would guess than many already have the crop in the ground. And if not, they couldnβt switch to an ethanol crop in any game changing way because there wasnβt enough seed prepared for such a change.
Bottom line, Iβm very skeptical that allowing industry to purchase field corn for ethanol production this summer can make a material difference in the U.S. food supply.βJoe]
I agree, but you should add that Corn is also used indirectly in our food chain to fatten animals before slaughtering, and processed to use as an ingredient (corn starch for example) in many processed foods. Still the ability our supply chains to change on a dime is limited.
Biden’s statement is just PR. If he really wanted to have an impact on price, he would encourage work from home which would save considerably more energy.
I am seeing people I know who have livestock say feed prices are increasing somewhat rapidly, so any field corn the oil companies divert for ethanol production will increase the cost of the remaining field corn as feed for livestock. But I donβt know how much effect that will have on beef prices etc this coming year.
1)I agree with the general thesis.
2)Just to nitpick, corn meal is made from field corn, so people do eat field corn directly (in addition to using it as livestock feed). Corn meal was once a staple for poor people in the southeastern US, though not so much anymore. It is still a staple in parts of the third world, e.g. Africa, so there is an argument that burning more ethanol locally could cause hunger in Africa, with the Russo-Ukrainian war disrupting grain exports.
3)In my starving student days I worked in a lab doing corn research, and had access to fresh field corn. It’s edible … but not very tasty :-).
IANAF (I am not a farmer) and this is outside my fence, but it seems the divide is not between field and sweet corn, but between the ethanol and animal feed branches of field corn consumption. Closing down the ethanol production branch would benefit the animal feed branch and boost food supplies, and improve motor fuel. But, and there’s always a but in the room, the present situation is driven by a previous, arbitrary administrative position, and government driven distortion of the market forces.
Yes, this is how I read neon’s post, too.
We looked into the issues of food supply over the next few years and decided it was worth while to learn a bit more about home grown food.
We have chickens, we have bunnies (not food). We are looking into other sources of meat animals.
But the one that I found most interesting is “feed corn.” A fifty pound bag of feed corn at the local feed store is un-medicated, untreated and around $15.
You can boil it in lime water and turn it into hominy. You can grind it and turn it into corn meal which in turn is used for a number of corn based foods. Corn meal can be used to make your own cereal.
You can take the hominy and dry it grind it and turn it into yummy tortillas and other foods.
Corn meal/hominy is a nice addition to many foods.
When you see “corn” as an ingredient on any food product (corn flakes for example) that corn is field corn.
This new ruling will divert corn from human use to burning it in cars. There are a number of articles out there discussing how burning corn in cars caused food prices to go up.
1. not enough stations carry e15 to really make a difference.
2. as suggested, ethanol plants really can’t expand that fast but given we are only looking at being able to have E15 vs E10 in a few stations they may be able to boost production on existing plant to fill the incremental volume increase necessary
3. The far bigger factor that will drive corn and thus beef, pork and chicken higher is the fertilizer shortage due to the Ukraine war had caused many farmers to change from corn to soybeans as they use less fertilizer. Soybeans do not product the bushels per acre that corn does and do fatten cattle as well as corn.
Field corn is used in masa harina, a staple food in South America. Sweet corn is not relevant to the food crisis (it is not nutritious), but field corn is very relevant.
Does south America rely on U.S. field corn?
Look a little father back the supply chain. Fertilizers and pesticides used to grow either form of corn can get misallocated to production of field corn to become methanol instead of sweet corn for direct human consumption. The prices of these precursors, if you will, have risen before, and faster than, the products. That lag will last perhaps one growing season.
Sorry, ethanol in fuel is just another bullshit scam by the elites. ADM, (Archer Daniels Midland co.), Processes most of the ethanol for government mandated environmental laws. It makes as much money off the subsidies as it does by making low-grade ethanol.
It was always a way to steal from you. And Joe’s helping boost their stock. Soon they will be buying some of Hunter’s painting for the corporate offices?
I have a chemistry book from 1899 that tells you how to assemble ethanol from methane. (The simplest hydrocarbon, thus easiest to create.)
The distillation of corn is the most wasteful process to create ethanol ever invented. Makes good whiskey. But otherwise it’s bullshit.
And any chemist who doesn’t know that must have gone to Harvard.
Plus the fact that thermal depolymerization makes using the corn stocks a much more efficient, (85%), environmentally friendly way of making fuel.
And using the corn for cattle feed and food.
But Joe the meat-puppet did his job. He drove up the price of everything just as he was told to.
Ever wonder why you can grow and process a gallon of milk cheaper than you can produce a gallon of gas?
A peripheral note is that several years ago Tequila production took a hit after farmers in Mexico switched from growing Agave to growing corn. Apparently the increased profits justified the costs. This still affects booze prices because it takes several years for Agave to mature.
IIRC, it is a 7 year growth cycle for agave, which is why the south of the border growers were so willing to rip out those plants and plant corn. This was mentioned when the push for corn into fuel was first proposed.
Government subsidies are always sought by farmers, as there is so much volatility in that business area. This year is going to be epic in food production and sales disturbances. Following years will also be memorable.
They have their goal. Mass starvation is the best way to both totally control the population and kill off at minimum 95% of it before 2030
As I recall, the last time they were pushing ethanol in fuel, I was living in SE Idaho. A lot of fields that would have usually been wheat, turned into corn. Sure, we don’t use the wheat for fuel, but if they’re growing ethanol corn instead of wheat, the end effect is the same.
The corn used to make ethanol is not lost to use as animal feed.A byproduct of the process is distillers grains, essentially the used up corn mash.This is sold as a very high protein feed supplement. Not that I’m in favor of ethanol production for fuel.
The laws/regulations requiring ethanol as a gasoline additive is a subsidy to farmers, and is an opportunity cost for the use of the land on which it is farmed.
Also, corn is heavily dependent on fertilizer for good yields – more than most other crops raised at scale – or at least needs good field rotation to maintain yields. This means that the price of fertilizer is also subsidized.
Without the subsidies, would that land be used to produce more food? I don’t know that answer, but it’s easy to see that without the subsidy to the farmers, something else would be done with the land.
Kurt
Seems like the key element of all this foolishness is being lost to arguments that are unrelated to the supposed reason for using ethanol as fuel. The White House and supporting string pullers want you to believe that ethanol is a viable fuel and that we can easily crank more of it into our fuel supply chain and all will be well. Don’t worry, nothing to see here, life remains the same, just move on. In reality, ethanol carries about 25 MJ/kg of energy whereas gasoline carries about 45 MJ/kg (depending on who is calculating it and for what purpose. These are ballpark numbers). That is a substantial difference in fuel efficiency and will make a very marked difference in performance and actual cost of fuel. Now add to that the deleterious effect that higher concentrations of ethanol have on fuel systems and the associated costs for repair and replacement and it is a non starter for anyone with a modicum of understanding (ethanol destroys neoprene, a common gasket material in fuel systems and also collects water). This is just a purposeful distraction to keep people from looking too deeply and responding accordingly.
Sort of continuing Powerwagon’s thoughts, methanol has ~68K BTU/gallon, ethanol ~64K, gasoline ~116K, diesel ~128K.
Grade school arithmetic shows alcohol, in either form, is a net loser on the combustion scale, not to mention the cost of production; no slide rules or calculators necessary, this can be done by counting with one’s fingers.
I’ve used methanol in racing engines, and it requires pushing about 2.4X more methanol than gasoline just to get an engine to run on it. It’s an oxygenated fuel so it brings some beneficial oxy to the mix, and it allows, and benefits from, substantially higher compression ratios than gasoline, in some cases, just below the diesel range. One gets a big horsepower jump in exchange for higher cost and greater fuel consumption which became a fundamental strategy consideration (7 gallons/hour on gasoline went to 15-16 per hour on methanol).
It’s also corrosive to aluminum and the smart money flushes it out of the fuel system (and engine) as soon as possible after the race. Alcohol is also very hydroscopic and if contaminated with enough water can produce fuel line freezes in winter.
Only an idiot would use alcohol for a general-use motor fuel in an uncontrolled environment; specific, well controlled use, fine, because the people using it understand, and willingly accept, the limitations.
Everyone is arguing about calories diverted from human and animal consumption to fuel use, and that’s not just an important consideration, it’s critical and can easily be a survival issue (we’re about to find out just how critical over the next year). But what about the cost of expensive damage to vehicles and equipment? Anyone running small engines – landscape contractors, etc. – already knows to hunt down non-ethanol gasoline for use in their equipment, the penalty for not doing so is is repeated fuel system rebuilds because alcohol attacks the neoprene and rubber fuel system parts.
Who is going to pay for repairs to Bob’s older F-150, Susie’s Camry, or Elaine’s Chevrolet after a few months of 15% and 15%+ ethanol damage?
I’m curious – where are the state governors in this? Several years ago Rick Scott in Florida (now a senator) EO’d gas in Florida to have the maximum 10% allowed under EPA regulations (and vehicle gas mileage clearly shows the result). If a governor can EO it up, a governor can EO it down and state legislatures have even more power.
A lot if good points above.
In the end it is about resources allocation.
It is the use if land, fuel, manpower, fertilizer, water, etc and it takes away from food, feed stock (also food), etc.
I don’t know that this is a payoff to ADM, I think this is about their environmental agenda and ignorance about pretty much everything.
My problem with the government mandated resource allocation is that the decision also reallocates my resources which are already constrained. But, hey, I am just a little guy that is readily ignored. The willful ignorance of the government elites in these matters will eventually generate a very unwelcome response. The cynic in me thinks that such a response is knowledgeably being promoted to provide an excuse for much harsher future responses to resistance to government compulsion.
Two words: Opportunity Cost
What else could have been farmed on those tens of thousands of square miles?
Why would anyone want to use 15% alky fuel in their vehicles? IIRC, it was originally estimated that the average car could burn 10% without too much hassle, but they didn’t talk much about the loss of fuel mileage attendant with that much dilution of gasoline. 15% will cause problems for most vehicles, and probably lead to damage to air-cooled engines such as lawn mowers and generators.
There are some vehicles that were designed/engineered to handle the e85 fuel mix, or any variation between. They were termed Flex-Fuel vehicles. I have one, and I try not to buy any gas that has that 10% mix, as it lowers the fuel mileage noticeably. Even adding a bottle of fuel system cleaner causes problems. The fuel system has an alcohol sensor (VERY expensive part) that causes the engine computer to adjust how much fuel it injects. If it fails, the default setting is max alcohol fuel amount, which will kill your catalytic converter right quick.