<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.18928">
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Corbel>Alexander,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Corbel>If we were talking about bread instead of
oil and I deducted the cost of the flour and the gas to cook it, from my
taxes would that mean</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Corbel>my bread is subsidized? We have been
converting contaminated grain and feed into ETOH alcohol since the early 70's.
It costs more in </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Corbel>natural gas to distill than it is worth. The
US government pays us 45 cents per gallon as an actual subsidy over
and above the real tax deductible</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Corbel>costs. The government then turns around and
charges 60 cents per gallon on imported ETOH from Brazil. 40+ percent of
the corn in the us will</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Corbel>be diverted to ETOH production this year. In
Brazil they use sugar cane which is much less expensive to produce and is not
much of the food chain. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Corbel></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Corbel>Perhaps it would be good if you would list
the actual "tax breaks" you claim they receive <FONT size=3
face="Times New Roman">i.e."some of those costs are absorbed by tax
payers"</FONT>. In this way we know you are not talking about
detectable </FONT><FONT size=2 face=Corbel>expenses. The 45 cents we get for our
alcohol is a real hand out.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Corbel>You mentioned "<FONT size=3
face="Times New Roman">some support for renewable energy, but "not a lot" what
to you is a lot. Did you hear about the ETOH subsidy put into the budget during
the </FONT></FONT>lame duck congress? In 2009 the 45 cents was paid on and
average of 700,000 barrels per day, most of which was</DIV>
<DIV>paid to ADM. If you do the math the "not a lot" comes to about $15.75
million per day. Last year it came to over $7 billion, "not a
lot"???</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Corbel>I think you need to define the difference
between a subsidy and a cost of production.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Corbel>"<FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman">If 50% of the
system had been paid for" it would have meant 50% was a subsidy. All that means
is it was not feasible and did not stand</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV>on its own merits, which gets to my point.</DIV>
<DIV>Please list a current credible source for your statement "fossil fuel not
receiving such cost support". </DIV>
<DIV>With regard to"they have proposed offshore drilling for the first time".
While they talk about more drilling, the fact is the current regime has only
issued 3 new drilling permits and they are conditional. Hundreds of existing
permits were put on hold, and hundreds of drilling rigs that were already
operating remain shut down. </DIV>
<DIV>The head of the current regime stated flatly he would bankrupt coal
companies. As a direct result the new coal fired Power Plant that was
under construction in Bowie AZ has been stopped. No new Plants have been
permitted, or under construction under the new administration.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>"I would also encourage you to do some reading about food exports to the
developing world". I have looked into it and that is to my point of
efficient food production. We produce crops now at a cost that is lower than we
did in the 1960"s and do it with out subsidies. During that same time period
many of our costs have gone up 800%++. I do not see how "local farmers"
not being competitive is relevant to our discussion. In our area only 20% of the
farmers that were in production in the 60's steal farm. Back then, we farmed
dozens of small fields with small inefficient tractors and hundreds of laborers.
We now have combined the fields, use almost no labor and have eliminated
the small inefficient tractors. There is an economy of scale that small farms
cannot achieve and this is the primary reason for lower grain costs not
subsidies. If you check the prices US farmers were paid over the last 3 decades,
you will see those prices have not gone up, nearly as much.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Corbel>Sorry but not even close, "<FONT size=3
face="Times New Roman">addressed the basis behind "artificially cheap fossil
fuel production". Your primes is based on out dated information and according to
my sources your source was not credible when it was written. Perhaps you
can find a government source to support there numbers in as much as the
government is supposedly making the payments.</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Corbel></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Corbel>Finally to this: <FONT size=3
face="Times New Roman">"Please notice the lack of multiple ?? or !!. Lets
talk, not "yell". When I yell or wish to express anger in an email I
due so this way <A href="mailto:&%$#@*%">&%$#@*%</A></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Corbel>When I use ???? or !!!! it is my way to
express my skepticism and or incredulity, not volume or anger.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Corbel></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Corbel>Brent</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Corbel></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Corbel></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=alex@sistemabiobolsa.com
href="mailto:alex@sistemabiobolsa.com">Alexander Eaton</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=digestion@lists.bioenergylists.org
href="mailto:digestion@lists.bioenergylists.org">For Discussion of Anaerobic
Digestion</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, January 19, 2011 2:39
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Digestion] Biogas
conversation rates</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>Brent, I don't want to gang up on you, but the idea that fossil
fuel is free is really a hard concept to grasp. The days of Texas crude
bubbling out of the ground have been over for a long time. Maybe, once
billions are spent on research, survey's, permits, drilling, extracting,
ground pressurization, military action, security forces, refining, and dealing
with the toxic byproducts, the oil it self is free. It is artificially,
cheap because some of those costs are absorbed by tax payers, and therefore
the companies commercializing the petroleum can sell it for less. These
are simple truths of the industry that anyone in the petroleum industry could
share with you. The records that Steve shared regarding subsides is
dated, but you find that those numbers are far larger today, especially for
fossil fuel. Just the tax breaks for the larges fossil fuel producers
dwarfs any subsidies available for renewable energy (e.g. AD).
<BR> <BR>
<DIV>"In the US, the current regime is propping up alternate energy with
unsustainable subsidies, while at the same time, stopping the
production of domestic fossil fuels."<BR><BR>Sure, there is some support for
renewable energy, but not a lot, and certainly not more than petroleum,
nuclear, and other energy sources that will not provide sustainable, safe and
clean energy production in the future. Many new technologies need help
to get established. I have been conducting feasibility studies for the
REAP program for AD projects in the US, and thankfully that support has been
there to help some really good projects get off the ground. The idea is
that volume and "lessons learned" will make the technology more
competitive. Would you not have appreciated technical and financial
support 20 years ago when your AD system was installed? If 50% of the
system had been paid for and you had realized additional savings by having
strong R&D behind you, you systems would have made your farm more
economically successful. Are we not on the same page here?
<BR><BR>Another thing that would make clean technology more competitive would
be fossil fuel not receiving such cost support. It is also not a fair
characterization of the "regime" to say they have been against domestic fuels,
as they have proposed offshore drilling for the first time in many locations
and have not posed additional regulations in other areas. <BR><BR>We are
not saying domestic fossil fuel sources should not be used, but rather as
Steve said, there should be triage. Agriculture and vital services
should have priority, instead of, say, the high school kid that circles my
block 15 times a day in his parents Escalade, some very inefficient (efficient
here meaning use of energy per cubic foot and the ability to retain heat)
housing stock, and nearly 25% of household energy use powering phantom loads
that are not actually being used. Without much effort we
could demonstrate many examples of inefficient energy use, that should not
offend you. Obesity in the US is an example of wasteful energy use as
well, given that food is energy. When I speak about efficiency, I am
referring to the amount of energy that goes into a process as compared to the
desired outcome, work, or value you are trying to get from the process.
<BR><BR>I would also encourage you to do some reading about food exports to
the developing world, and the damage it has done to local production. In
short: grains enter the market at prices lower than local farmers can produce
the same grains for. This makes there farms less profitable, and
therefore they are unable to invest further in their production.
Sustained periods of this put some farmers out of business. With less
local farmers, the market become more dependent on the imported grains, and so
on. In this debate, I would encourage you to not characterize all third
world farmers as subsistence, and there is a strong small-farm commercial
industry that is very important to the economies of these countries.<BR><BR>I
hope this has addressed the basis behind "artificially cheap fossil fuel
production", and why the disparity between industrial and developing world
contexts can lead to unhealthy imbalances (i.e. illegal immigration).
The main point here is that efficiency should be everyone's friend, and
politically, it is a very conservative (right) concept. <BR><BR>A
<BR><BR>Please notice the lack of multiple ?? or
!!. Lets talk, not "yell". <BR> <BR></DIV><BR>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 1:57 PM, bingham <SPAN
dir=ltr><<A
href="mailto:bingham@zekes.com">bingham@zekes.com</A>></SPAN> wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid; MARGIN: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; PADDING-LEFT: 1ex"
class=gmail_quote>
<DIV bgcolor="#ffffff">
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Corbel>Ruben,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Corbel>???? was not stuck!!!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Corbel>It seems you are avoiding answering the
question by asking a question, a rouse used by those who do not
like the answer ??</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Corbel>It also seems you have missed the central
claim? Or you are using a tactic of smoke a mirrors to obfuscate the primes
of the thread to which I responded,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>i.e.. "Anaerobic Digestions and the AD industry, which is currently
undermined by artificially cheap fossil fuel production and use (not a
political statement)".</DIV>
<DIV>I will help you back to the point: "artificially cheap fossil fuel
production". How is it "artificially cheap"????</DIV>AD has proven it has a
place in the overall energy system. It is not now practical in
all applications.
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Corbel>B</FONT></DIV><FONT color=#888888>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Corbel></FONT> </DIV></FONT>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: rgb(0,0,0) 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=im>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: rgb(228,228,228)"><B>From:</B>
<A title=9watts@gmail.com href="mailto:9watts@gmail.com"
target=_blank>Reuben Deumling</A> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=im>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=digestion@lists.bioenergylists.org
href="mailto:digestion@lists.bioenergylists.org" target=_blank>For
Discussion of Anaerobic Digestion</A> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=im>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, January 19, 2011
1:09 PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Digestion] Biogas
conversation rates</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=h5>Brent,<BR><BR>your question-mark key is stuck.<BR><BR>But
back to your central claim, if fossil fuels are free-as-is I'm not sure
why you are worrying about a payback on your AD system. Something doesn't
compute. <BR><BR>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 12:04 PM, bingham <SPAN
dir=ltr><<A href="mailto:bingham@zekes.com"
target=_blank>bingham@zekes.com</A>></SPAN> wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid; MARGIN: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; PADDING-LEFT: 1ex"
class=gmail_quote>
<DIV bgcolor="#ffffff"><FONT size=2 face=Corbel><FONT size=3
face="Times New Roman">Fossil fuel sits in the ground and is FREE as is.
You cannot make free any
cheaper.</FONT></FONT><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<P></P>
<HR>
<DIV class=im>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>Digestion
mailing list<BR><BR>to Send a Message to the list, use the email
address<BR><A href="mailto:Digestion@bioenergylists.org"
target=_blank>Digestion@bioenergylists.org</A><BR><BR>to UNSUBSCRIBE or
Change your List Settings use the web page<BR><A
href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/digestion_lists.bioenergylists.org"
target=_blank>http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/digestion_lists.bioenergylists.org</A><BR><BR>for
more information about digestion, see<BR>Beginner's Guide to Biogas<BR><A
href="http://www.adelaide.edu.au/biogas/"
target=_blank>http://www.adelaide.edu.au/biogas/</A><BR>and the Biogas
Wiki <A href="http://biogas.wikispaces.com/"
target=_blank>http://biogas.wikispaces.com/</A><BR><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>Digestion
mailing list<BR><BR>to Send a Message to the list, use the email
address<BR><A
href="mailto:Digestion@bioenergylists.org">Digestion@bioenergylists.org</A><BR><BR>to
UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page<BR><A
href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/digestion_lists.bioenergylists.org"
target=_blank>http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/digestion_lists.bioenergylists.org</A><BR><BR>for
more information about digestion, see<BR>Beginner's Guide to Biogas<BR><A
href="http://www.adelaide.edu.au/biogas/"
target=_blank>http://www.adelaide.edu.au/biogas/</A><BR>and the Biogas Wiki
<A href="http://biogas.wikispaces.com/"
target=_blank>http://biogas.wikispaces.com/</A><BR><BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR><BR
clear=all><BR>-- <BR>Alexander Eaton<BR>Sistema
Biobolsa<BR>IRRI-Mexico<BR>RedBioLAC<BR><BR>Mex cel: (55) 11522786<BR>US cel:
970 275 4505<BR><BR><A href="mailto:alex@irrimexico.org"
target=_blank>alex@irrimexico.org</A><BR><A
href="mailto:alex@sistemabiobolsa.com"
target=_blank>alex@sistemabiobolsa.com</A><BR><BR><A
href="http://sistemabiobolsa.com" target=_blank>sistemabiobolsa.com</A><BR><A
href="http://www.irrimexico.org" target=_blank>www.irrimexico.org</A><BR><A
href="http://www.redbiolac.org" target=_blank>www.redbiolac.org</A><BR><BR>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>Digestion mailing
list<BR><BR>to Send a Message to the list, use the email
address<BR>Digestion@bioenergylists.org<BR><BR>to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your
List Settings use the web
page<BR>http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/digestion_lists.bioenergylists.org<BR><BR>for
more information about digestion, see<BR>Beginner's Guide to
Biogas<BR>http://www.adelaide.edu.au/biogas/<BR>and the Biogas Wiki
http://biogas.wikispaces.com/<BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>