50% percent of the corn grown on our land goes to ethanol,30% goes to feed our 1500 head of pure breead black angus,and the remaining goes to open market.So 50% of our corn does go to food.It's not the corn I was talking about it's the personal money invested in the ethanol plants themselfs,if the demad dropps then the plants shut down then I'm out personnally $15,000,and a possibility of making that back by 200% per year in 20 years.

I agree that Consumer Reports isn't always excellent, but I like their tests. They have fuel economy ratings that are far closer to real world. They also do some good stuff with braking, acceleration, and avoidance maneuvers.

I trust them for appliances.
I take their car recommendations with a grain of salt (though they do recommend the Liberty)

for electronics and cameras, I think they are fairly poor.

_________________
_________
Trailpixie
http://www.trailpixie.net
04 Limited with offroad package
Frankenlifted

The only reason that your ethanol investment may pay off is because the government is forcing people to use it. It is less efficient, more corrosive, more toxic, more expensive, and it's production takes more resources than gasoline. I don't want you to go to the poor house any more than I wanted to see the people who invested in dot com stocks go to the poor house. But I didn't want the government to forcibly take my money to support the dot bombers, and I don't want the government to force me to keep the ethanol industry afloat. If ethanol was truly an alternative to gasoline, it would not need government intervention. The reason the 10% ethanol blend is less expensive is because it is subsidized by tax payers... in other words, it's still more expensive.

[quote="tjkj2002"][quote="jcphoto20"]tjkj2002, you wouldnt approve of what i do either.

if you grow for ethanol, im sure you support my industry more than i support yours, by a long ways. if you were to grow for food, then it would be the other way around.[/quote]50% percent of the corn grown on our land goes to ethanol,30% goes to feed our 1500 head of pure breead black angus,and the remaining goes to open market.So 50% of our corn does go to food.It's not the corn I was talking about it's the personal money invested in the ethanol plants themselfs,if the demad dropps then the plants shut down then I'm out personnally $15,000,and a possibility of making that back by 200% per year in 20 years.[/quote]

o in that case, i just feel bad for the ethanol part of the business decision because i hope the whole ethanol thing tanks bigtime. its wrong for the environment, society and more. id reinvest, but thats just me, and that would be wrong from a money perspective, because im sure you will make tons.

such is the american way, tons of money to be made by those in the wrong businesses, that are actually bad for most of everyone else.

_________________
Admin note:
This account has been deactivated.

Time to read up on ethanol,the plants make more than just ethanol,many of your everyday items are produced there as by products.Water is corrosive(premotes rust),the soft drink Coke is corrosive(it'll disolve a metal nail).It's no more corrosive than gas or diesel.Dang right the goverment is forcing the use of it,trying to reduce the dependency on foriegn oil.Newer plants are getting very efficiant also and are using alternitive ways to power the plants themselfs,It takes time to perfect new technoligies.

It's not the plant that is inefficient, it is the ethanol itself. It produces 40% of the energy of gasoline. so you have to burn more of it to produce the same energy. I hate to break it to everyone, but the only way to relieve us from our dependency on foreign oil (mostly from Canada) is to produce more OIL in the US. We have plenty of it. But the same lobby that ensures the government forces us to use ethanol, also lobbies to limit new oil production. That would take money away from the ethanol producers. There is nothing patriotic about forcing people to use one's product, fund its production, or promote the limiting of production of more useful solutions.

Sorry we disagree.

TJKJ2002,
Let me clarify that I did not mean that you were unpatriotic in the post above. You have sacrificed far more than I have hoped to for this country & I sincerly thank you.

I know I said "your product", I was referring to the general notion of industries & lobby groups petitioning the government to force us to use their products. It's a speech pattern habit I got from my dad, saying "your" when describing something. I should have said "one's product", in fact I'll change that now. You are undeniably a patriotic American, & if I made you, or anyone else on the board think I meant otherwise, I apologize.

Dennis

ethanol is a bad idea for everyone that isnt making money off of it.

_________________
Admin note:
This account has been deactivated.