New federal biofuel plan finds instant critic in key Democrat
August 17, 2011 at 7:00 pm in West Central Tribune
ST. PAUL Minnesota’s senior congressman fears the Obama administration has fired a shot over the ethanol industry’s bow in seeking a home-grown fuel for the Navy.
Continue Reading
It’s pure stupidity to suggest that ethanol is driving up the cost of food. Anyone with (1) a brain and (2) any knowledge of the agriculture industry knows that ethanol production creates countless byproducts that are used for feedstock for our livestock industry. Ethanol production is simply a more refined use of the raw product of corn.
Like or Dislike:
9 
14
Because there are current benefits for MN to produce ethanol the science should not stop looking for alternatives. It is not stupid to suggest that ethanol is driving up food costs. The benefit of creating ethanol has not been proven to reduce oil consumption, it takes a great deal of petroleum based products to grow, fertilize, harvest, and process the crop into fuel…seems like a waste to use so much energy to produce energy.
Like or Dislike:
13 
8
Nora, have you ever stepped one foot on a farm?
Do you have any idea what products come out of an ethanol plant?
Like or Dislike:
5 
12
r. o let me answer that question for Nora. Billions and Billions of our income tax dollars in their billfold**the by-product*** plus votes for generalissimo prez b o . You would never, never , hear that from THEM, would you>?
Like or Dislike:
5 
12
Yes Randy, I am a farm girl. I also think there is a market for our crops without so much dependence on ethanol. Ethanol produced from higher sugar content switch grass (not a food source) has great potential of replacing corn – can be grown on less quality soil and it produces a higher octane fuel. You know I lean left on politics – probably more so than Rep. Peterson – we can’t slow or ignore science. Please keep an open mind to that. I can drive a tractor, I’ve bailed a lot of hay and pitched a lot of manure – my comments are not ignorant, only objective.
Like or Dislike:
15 
4
nora, you preach ‘benefits in your political **DFLer** speech. t hose benefits only benefit Mn. DFLers, that in return benefit prez generalissimo b o re-election campaign using our income tax dollars. You can also ask r. o if he ever worked on a farm for $5.00 a month as I did during the war***41,42**, had he, any respect for his preaching could be understood.
Like or Dislike:
6 
12
I’m not the preacher here ed – I’m just sharing concerns and research I’ve done. The serious matter of fuel source is not partisan – environmental issues are left and right as long as we all live on this planet.
Like or Dislike:
11 
5
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
4 
15
What Randy? Please elaborate – I enjoy this forum for occasional educational benefits and you often are a good source (never Ed – he’s just a bitter old conspiracy theorist).
Like or Dislike:
9 
7