US Supreme Court rejects challenges to increased ethanol use

Page 1 of 2  
I don't understand how the Supremes could put aside all the rational arguments against EPA's push for E15:
http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/Energy-Voices/2013/0624/Supreme-Court-sides-with-ethanol-in-renewable-fuel-debate
Though newer car engines would not get damaged by it, but what about the millions of older cars on the road, not to mention what this will do to food prices.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Then again, they also declined to reject Obamacare, so...
They're just a bunch of over-educated twits who are totally full of themselves.
--
Tegger

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 6/24/13 5:12 PM, Tegger wrote:

Why do you care? You live in Canada.

Unlike any of the twits who post here.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 6/25/2013 9:21 AM, MM wrote:

Are you a twit?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'm an UNDER-educated twit.
I, at least, am aware of my ignorance, unlke them.
--
Tegger

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/24/2013 02:47 PM, cameo wrote:

http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/Energy-Voices/2013/0624/Supreme-Court-sides-with-ethanol-in-renewable-fuel-debate

you don't understand it? that implies you don't understand:
1. how the agribusiness lobby wouldn't get richer. 2. how the politicians wouldn't benefit from the agribusiness vote 3. how the auto industry wouldn't benefit from selling you a new car after the old one gets ruined. 4. how the oil industry wouldn't benefit from selling you taxpayer subsidized fuel that gives lower mpg's and thus get to sell you more. 5. how the court's appointees don't from time to time "get reminded" of how grateful they are to their political appointers.
all these interests balanced against those of the schlub on the sofa watching american idol, eating cheetos and scratching his ass? yeah, the supremes are all about looking after you on this one buddy.
--
fact check required

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 6/24/2013 6:17 PM, jim beam wrote:

That's way too cynical even from you, Jim. ;-)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 6/25/2013 1:29 PM, cameo wrote:

Agribusiness lobby will not get righer. Corn growers and processors probably will but, the season here (ND) was so late it maybe that all the folks with corn may not get a good crop--we put in beans.
Rick
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/25/2013 06:03 PM, Pawalleye wrote:

when i say "agribusiness", i mean the traders. those guys own the market, and they make big bucks whatever way the market goes. and if they can sell high priced corn from a poor crop into the ethanol industry, which they also substantially own, with taxpayer subsidy, they get even richer.
bottom line, burning food is either an act of war where you want to starve your enemy, or it's a symptom of complete retardation. when grain reserves are at their lowest since ww2, and when it's done by government mandate, and when their actions are egged on by traders, most of whom are really smart people, you really have to wonder whether some kind of war isn't the actual objective. the british ruthlessly exploited the irish potato famine for example.
--
fact check required

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 6/25/2013 8:47 PM, jim beam wrote:

All the corn in this area is contracted so there is no middle man
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/26/2013 07:13 AM, Pawalleye wrote:

contracted to whom?
--
fact check required

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 6/26/2013 8:01 AM, jim beam wrote:

To the middle men, of course.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 6/26/2013 1:13 PM, cameo wrote:

WrongO generally the contract is with the company that markets the final product.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/26/2013 11:45 AM, Pawalleye wrote:

you're not selling it to the retail consumer - anyone else is some kind of middle-person.
--
fact check required

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 6/26/2013 7:53 PM, jim beam wrote:

We have a whole bunch of value added ag business in ND so it can go to the folks who sell it to the retailers. These companies produce the product and then it goes to retail outlets.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/26/2013 06:29 PM, Pawalleye wrote:

sure, but like i said, many also trade on the commodity markets. they pretty much have to.
--
fact check required

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 6/26/2013 10:01 AM, jim beam wrote:

we contract with the ethanol producer--that would be the normal rout. I works that way for most of the crops grown up here. So oilseed sunflower is contracted with Red River Commodities. Confectionery sunflowers the contract is with the company that markets the final product.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/26/2013 11:43 AM, Pawalleye wrote:

ok, two things:
1. how is pricing set? spot at delivery? pre-agreed with no subsequent market adjust? any hedging? if you're contracted at one price, and they can re-sell at something higher, that's often what they'll do as long as basic requirements are met.*
2. just because they're a processor doesn't mean they don't trade. hersheys are big cocoa consumers, but they're also huge cocoa traders, selling as well as buying and gaming the markets. the bigger the player, the more pricing influence they have.
* here in kalifornistan when we had the enron traders manipulating our electricity markets [with complete impunity], aluminum smelters shut down because it was more profitable to re-sell their electricity to this fine state than it was to stay in production.
--
fact check required

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 6/26/2013 7:52 PM, jim beam wrote:

Hedging is always a good thing to do because it protects the grower and I can tell you that in "lean years" it has saved our butt. Usually there is a trigger price but, if the market goes up then you get that price. I know all about Enron--lost $200,000.00 to those guys. If Skilling gets out I hope somebody finds him with some high velocity lead.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/26/2013 06:27 PM, Pawalleye wrote:

ok, good. guessing you didn't get screwed by that asshole corzine - many farmers hedged with m.f. global and got thoroughly corn-holed.

it's not "if" - he's just had his sentence reduced: <http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_23515542/prison-sentence-ex-enron-ceo-jeffrey-skilling-reduced
justice would be better served by finding out who his friends are. skilling was no great architect - but the lawyers and accountants that devised the plans he followed sure were. and they're still walking about scott free.
--
fact check required

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.