"If the vast majority of the world's scientists are right, we have just ten years...," to quote Al Gore, but then he turns around and promotes hybrids--though Consumer Reports says that automakers routinely inflate their mileage figures, in the case of hybrids by up to 40%!!!
On the other hand, fully electric cars are so WONDERFUL that one lessee actually sued to keep his from being taken back, yet CA's Zero Emission Vehicle mandate was eliminated because studies by the automakers showed no one was interested!!!
"We know where most heat-trapping gases come from: power plants and vehicles. And we know how to curb their emissions: modern technology and stronger laws," to quote the National Resources Defenses Council, but then they too turn around and promote hybrids: "You may recall that last January at the Washington Auto Show, Ford showed a prototype of the first flex-fuel hybrid that can run on gasoline or up to 85% ethanol. Now if we could just get the auto manufacturers to put it all together and actually produce it rather than just showing off prototypes, then we would have a car that would give us drivers a real choice: gasoline, ethanol, or electricity."
In fact, mixing ethanol and gasoline is bad news, "Many studies show, however, that ethanol slightly raises the volatility of gasoline, causing increased emissions of HYDROCARBONS and nitrogen oxide, which can contribute to smog formation. Other studies have shown that mixing ethanol with gasoline increases emissions of a few other TOXIC air pollutants," National Sustainable Agriculture Information Service (NSAIS).
According to David Pimental, a leading Cornell University agriculture expert, 70% more energy is required to produce ethanol from corn than the energy that actually is in it. "Ethanol from corn costs about $1.74 per gallon to produce, compared with about $.95 to produce a gallon of gasoline. That helps explain why FOSSIL FUELS--NOT ETHANOL--ARE USED TO PRODUCE ETHANOL."
And according to Worldwatch institute, "biofuels produced on a large scale from low-yielding crops such as corn have the potential to produce as much or more greenhouse gas emissions than petroleum fuels do."
Which begs the question: wouldn't we be better off following Sen. Inhofe's lead, and simply denying global warming...?
The Government heavily subsidizes ethanol; Archer, Daniels, Midland is the nation's largest agriculture concern, and according to the Cato Institute every $1 of profits earned by its ethanol operation costs the taxpayers $30.
Of course, "newer manufacturing processes allow ethanol to be made from cellulosic feedstocks ... While not yet widely commercialized, cellulosic ethanol has some great advantages compared to corn-based ethanol, and is often viewed as the future of the US ethanol industry." NSAIS
On the downside, one study found that bioenergy from agriculture could displace ONLY 25% to 30% of US petroleum imports. (NSAIS)
So..., is Sen. Inhofe trying to tell us--in some mysterious way--that these numbers translate into a need for American boys to be drafted into giving up their lives fighting for cheaper Middle East oil?
Yeah, I think that's what he's saying--because otherwise our entire Government wouldn't be turning a blind eye to that US Dep't of Energy report that says that 150% of the entire world's electricity demand could be met with off-shore wind farms.
Like--how old is the windmill?