Wednesday, February 01, 2006
Really?In the New York Times editorial about Bush's SOTU remarks on energy independence, we read: It should be a humbling shock to American leaders that Brazil has managed to become energy self-sufficient during a period when the United States was focused on building bigger S.U.V.'s. Brazil did it? I was in Brazil in the early 1980's (doing a computer installation) and they were in the process of switching over from gasoline to ethanol. The oil shock of 1979 was still fresh in everybody's memory. Ethanol was what you put in the tank, and the odor was pervasive. The joke was that it smelled like they'd poured cheap wine on all the streets. Brazil's ethanol policy was criticized at the time and for almost two decades forward. Oil became cheap again. Ethanol production has its problems. Etc. But it looks as if Brazil made the right choice after all.
posted by Quiddity at 2/01/2006 07:39:00 AM
5 comments
Argentina is also self-sufficient. At a typical "gas" station, there's a wide variety of fuels, including propane.
They use "flex" engines in Brazil. Flex engines can run on gasoline or ethanol. California requires that its vehicles be able to run on ethanol "flex" engines. As a consequence, Detroit makes flex engines. Therefore, we can switch the whole country if we set up the distribution system to ethanol like the Brazilian Generals did (the only good thing those murderous bastards did?). We won't because it will cut into Exxon's profits. Conclusion? We have the technology but American hating Republicans want to keep us dependent on gasoline. My suggested solution? Let's nationalize the oil companies. They are working against us, instead of for us.
I wonder when the farm lobby will make a real push for ethanol. Can you imagine what would happen to corn prices? They'd make a mint!
Well, at least some countries are getting their acts together. Iceland, for example, is harnessing it's significant hydro power to make hydrogen and all vehicles will be required to be able to run on it. How is it that places like Brazil, Argentina and Iceland can make these moves and the US can't? Because we're burning $100,000.00 per MINUTE on the "cakewalk" of Iraq and will shatter our economy completely when we attack Iran with nukes (not to mention that every new war movie from then on will have the US in the Nazi's former role). Too bad the Democrats in Congress can't revert to their pre-12/12/00 selves and fight for what's right for a change!
Anonymous wrote, Well, at least some countries are getting their acts together. Iceland, for example, is harnessing it's significant hydro power to make hydrogen and all vehicles will be required to be able to run on it.
I don't think flooding large pristine areas to generate hydro constitutes "gettings one's act together."
|
