Random Internet Shit you've come across

AZVAJKU said:
Only to a politician does turning food into energy sound like a good idea. 🤬

You are literally trading your most important commodity for your second most important commodity. It’s like trading dimes for nickels.

Freaking ra-traded.

Oh yeah, if I remember correctly too much ethanol when it’s hot can lead to vapor lock?
Click to expand...
Corn subsidies in any form need to stop. High fructose corn syrup is probably worse for people than sucking down unfiltered cigarettes through a donkey dick.
 
Sharkey said:
Corn subsidies in any form need to stop.
Click to expand...
I actually did a big research paper on corn subsidies and all that entails about 10 years ago in college. What I found was scary back then. It’s basically beyond the point of no return and had huge impacts on soil chemistry and water retention. But because we’re using corn for so much more than just food, they’re clearing forests to plant more of it, which is incredibly hypocritical of all the tree huggers out there who see it as a “greener” option. Lots more too it than that though.
 
There’s always more to most subjects, but many fanboys of the “greener” options won’t hear it. I made the mistake of trying to have a discussion showing my point of view with one person, one time. Never again.
 
jeeeep said:
it also adds more smog
they claim it'll lower the price by 10c a gallon but, you'll have to refill more often so it'll cost you more than you save. It's psychological savings for the sheeple and since they've lowered the math standards, many won't even consider doing the math.
Click to expand...
No shit. Mileage loss will eat that up.
 
-AINOKEA- said:
I actually did a big research paper on corn subsidies and all that entails about 10 years ago in college. What I found was scary back then. It’s basically beyond the point of no return and had huge impacts on soil chemistry and water retention. But because we’re using corn for so much more than just food, they’re clearing forests to plant more of it, which is incredibly hypocritical of all the tree huggers out there who see it as a “greener” option. Lots more too it than that though.
Click to expand...
yep, years ago while channel flipping I ended up on a televised senate session because it was about the effectiveness of ethanol. They were showing scientific data that corn ethanol did not work, would not produce what the corn lobbyists claimed and the production at the time (not sure it's gotten better) would use more fuel to produce it than the claimed benefits would provide. In all, they stated it was nothing more that a massive subsidy for no return.
They also showed data that sugar cane ethanol would provide the benefits claimed by the corn lobbyists and would not need the processing because sugar didn't need to be refined into sugar to distill the ethanol. Corn turned out to be 50% effective as sugar cane.
The corn lobbyists are powerful and politicians are whores
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom