Comments on: “Sustainability” runs amok in my town of Chico

By: Pamela Gray

Pamela Gray — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 01:26:47 +0000

Except when I attend my every Friday night tavern event, I willingly buy rounds just as others willingly buy rounds. And get this: I buy rounds for mostly Republicans and when they buy rounds, I am readily included, even while knowing that I am the outcast liberal. It matters little who earns what. We are there as friends and colleagues. Word to the wise. Don’t use tavern nights as an experiment in taxes.

By: Mike Bryant

Mike Bryant — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 12:34:38 +0000

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes,it would go something like this: Keep in mind, this is to happen EVERY DAY! The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth man would pay $1.
The sixth man would pay $3.
The seventh man would pay $7.
The eighth man would pay $12.
The ninth man would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59. So, that’s what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. ‘Since you are all such good customers,’ he said, ‘I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20. Drinks for the ten now cost just $80 instead of $100. The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. The poorest four would still drink for free. But what about the other six men – the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his ‘fair share?’ They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man currently paying $1 and the sixth man currently paying $3 would each end up being PAID to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay. And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100%savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings). Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings. ‘I only got a dollar out of the $20,’declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,’ but he got $10!’ ‘Yeah, that’s right,’ exclaimed the fifth man. ‘I only saved a dollar, too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more than I got’ ‘That’s true!!’ shouted the seventh man. ‘Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!’ ‘Wait a minute,’ yelled the first four men in unison. ‘We didn’t get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!’ The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something. They didn’t have enough money between all 9 of them for even Half of the bill! And that, ladies and gentlemen, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works!! The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier. And this in turn will take money away from America, away from job creation, away from everything that makes America great!… David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics
University of Georgia

By: Graeme Rodaughan

Graeme Rodaughan — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 01:47:38 +0000

I don’t believe that one winter of extreme cold in the NH will kill the AGW Agenda – there is too much money and power, and political status wrapped up in it.

The cognitive dissonance for the average person will, I expect, increase. I have no predictions on what the average guy or gal is going to think of AGW at the end of the 2008/09 NH winter….

For some the cognitive dissonace will SNAP!… possibly when they get their heating bills.

By: Ellie In Belfast

Ellie In Belfast — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 23:51:45 +0000

Kum,
There are a lot of US (and EU) developers at pilot and in planning. I just haven’t seen much detail on efficiency figures.

re yellow grease – quality is the issue with waste oils and fats. Once they sit around in kitchens you have huge problems if you want a decent fuel.
Involved in commercialising a process several years ago that now recycles nearly 0.5million tonnes used cooking oil annually.

Getting late here – good night.

By: Kum Dollison

Kum Dollison — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 23:19:55 +0000

Ellie, a company named “Ceres” is working on seeds for miscanthus, switchgrass, etc. Until the research “shakes out” you probably should figure six, or seven hundred gallons/acre for lignocellulosic. Less in the northern states, a little more in the southeast.

And, yes, gassifying cellulose will return more energy than “liquifying” it.

As for as biodiesel: There really is no good “Oil” crop in the Northern Hemisphere. You can get six or seven hundred gallons/acre from Tropical crops such as Oil Palm, or coconut palm. We do have an interesting bush in the south called the “Chinese Tallow Tree.” It, also, will, theoretically, yield 600, or so, gal/acre.

All this said, though, the “Freebie,” right now is yellow grease. It’s estimated that you could operate about 13% of the trucks in California (probably, all of the School Buses on Yellow Grease.)

By: evanjones

evanjones — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 21:25:23 +0000

So peeking is dangerous?

Ask Pandora.

By: Ellie In Belfast

Ellie In Belfast — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 21:04:54 +0000

Sustainable thinking requires that you look at energy yield. If we turn to biomass, then we have to consider energy yield per acre, and energy use in harvest and transport of the crop (the proximity principle).

Let me make another pitch for biogas/biomethane as a fuel: energy per acre
http://biopact.com/2007/12/biomethane-presented-as-most-efficient.html
There is a nice graphic of how far a UK ‘Mini’ car can travel on biofuel from an acre. I’ve seen other versions of this, but none yet for ligocellulosic ethanol, (which would be interesting if anyone knows of a source).

Biodiesel fares worst taking a Mini just over 5030 miles/acre.
Bioethanol manages just over 7540 miles/acre.
Synthetic biodiesel (gasified biomass/F-T BTL) 13,960 miles/acre.
Biomethane (upgraded biogas) 24,390 miles/acre.

By: Bill P

Bill P — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 18:22:50 +0000

…a city wide inventory of carbon emissions. The task force, chaired by Vice Mayor Ann Schwab… focused on tallying carbon emissions in town. That effort… was a prelude to taxation followed by wanton spending. They had to inventory to know how to tax.

Sounds like a modern-day Domesday Book to me. When the Normans took over England from the Saxons, William sent out clerks with stubby pencils and thick glasses to see what everybody in the new kingdom owned… how many and how big were their hovels, how many sheep they kept, etc.

Some say the word came from doomsday, as in: when you’re called to settle your “final accounts”, here’s what you’ll owe. In the case of William the Conqueror, it was an efficient census that led to necessary and (probably more or less fair) system of taxation. In Chico (and elsewhere soon), it’s based on a stupid and wrongheaded premise that will some day be looked at as a scandalous waste of people’s resources.

If they start doing door-to-door surveys of people’s body mass index, it’s time to head for the hills.

By: Kum Dollison

Kum Dollison — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 15:54:23 +0000

E.M. Smith, if those rice stalks, and hulls were gassified you would still have the “ash” returned which could be put back on the land.

Corn Plus is doing that with ash from their syrup gassification and the farmers are lined up to purchase it. In this way you get the benefit of the energy, and the ash, too.

By: E.M.Smith

E.M.Smith — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 07:47:49 +0000

VSE Verisun et. al. bankruptcy: For some reason, folks at producing (and consuming companies) screw up and confound “hedges” with “directional trades” in futures markets. The results are universally horrid. American Airlines just locked in their fuel costs with forward contracts at about $120/bbl. Yup, near the top. Now they are hosed for 2 years. VSE did something similar. No hedges on the way up, then locked in at the top. I heard one report that they may have put on a directional short trade on the way up (exactly the opposite of a hedge). Gold producers are notorious for buying in their hedges right at the top for gold prices. There is something about the corporate mindset that is unable to keep away from directional trades and stick with hedges.

(The difference? If I need corn for my operation and can make money with corn at $4/bushel, then I buy forward contracts for delivery at $4 or below. Now I’m guaranteed some profit when corn rises OR falls. A directional trader would bet on a direction, perhaps shorting $4 contracts EXPECTING prices to drop. When prices rise to $5, not only did they lose the $1/bu for the contract, but they now are paying $5/bu for what they need to stay in business. So they don’t stay in business long. A hedge reduces the range of outcomes, a directional trade increases them – double or nothing…)

VSE is dead meat because of a bad trader on what ought to have been a hedging desk.

Per Chico and smoke. When I was a kid, the standard behavior was for farmers to burn the rice hulls, rice stubble, and peach / pear wood (from pruning and dead trees). Each fall the valley would fill with smoke. It would be much better to collect all those tons of biomass and turn them to fuel. Verinium (sp?) VRNM has a pilot plant up for cellulosic ethanol. They are building demonstration plants and preparing for production scale in the US and in Japan. If Chico really wanted to work on their sustainability, they would have a program with local farmers to produce sustainable fuels this way. Or contact GGRN Global Green Solutions who have a “green” system to turn waste wood into steam. Instead, farmers are punished for burning trash and citizens are punished for using fuel. Stop making problems and find ways to turn two problems into one solution.

Rather than all these newspeak “free” electricity for “free” electric cars, they would make real buisnesses making real fuel from local resources. Nothing is “free”, somebody pays for it.

BTW, during the winter, the area around Chico can be under fog and / or dank low cloud cover for weeks or months on end. Solar is not a solution for months on end there. Just 2000 feet up slope toward Paradise, you rise above the fog and low cloud into sunshine. But a nice wood powered steam plant could heat a lot of buildings in Chico…

Also FWIW, this winter has started off early and cold. With luck, it will kill the AGW agenda before the rabid believers can do more damage than they already have.

By: Kum Dollison

Kum Dollison — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 05:03:16 +0000

Don, I wouldn’t make too much of the ethanol bankruptcies. Over 150 ethanol plants have opened in the last couple of years. These are brand new operations with inexperienced management playing in a rough game. Commodities have busted some of the biggest, smartest, most experienced traders in the world in the last year. It would seem unlikely that the ethanol industry would go unscathed.

I don’t know much about Gateway, and Greater Ohio, but I would imagine that the story might be similar to Verasun. That was a case where, evidently, the owner thought that, due to the size corn purchases he made, he could drive the corn market down by shorting it. He couldn’t, and he lost his butt. Then, he bought forward at the top. Curtains.

150 other ethanol plants Didn’t do this and came out just fine. It’s a challenging business, and, I’m sure that from time to time we’ll hear of other companies taking gas. That’s America isn’t it?

As for MSW to ethanol, we’ll see soon enough. But, I wouldn’t bet against it.

By: Mike Bryant

Mike Bryant — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 04:46:51 +0000

The people in Gussing weren’t trying to buy “sustainability”. They knew they had wood to burn, and they knew they were spending too much bringing energy in, so they built wood burning power plants to save money.
They weren’t driving people out of Gussing, They were bringing people and businesses back into Gussing because they were saving the citizens’ money.

I am a plumber but I can see the difference. Kum described some things that make sense for cities. I don’t believe any of those things are on Chico’s agenda. If the Sustainability Task Force doesn’t understand these simple differences, perhaps it should be disbanded.

Can you imagine Chico installing wood burning power plants? It won’t happen. Can you imagine the city actually cutting costs and making Chico a place where businesses want to move to? Can you imagine tax rates going down. Can you imagine a city that actually serves the best interests of her people? Sure you can… Gussing.

By: Smokey

Smokey — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 04:14:42 +0000

Don Shaw:

Ouch!

Some folks would argue that the government should step in and save these companies at taxpayer expense [and you know who I mean].

By: Don Shaw

Don Shaw — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 03:34:32 +0000

Kum,
Thanks for the info on Bluefire. I am trying to collect more information on these type technologies. I note however that they have not yet demonstrated their technology to turn MSW (Municipal solid waste) into Ethanol in a commercial plant. Yet I can’t help but note that the first plant will be heavily subsidized by the taxpayers. I sure hope that these technologies work and make economic sense, but my experience makes me skeptical that this might be another waste oftaxpayers $$$.

Also your optimism on ethanol is brought to question by the following from the Daily Biofuels News Digest:

“In South Dakota, VeraSun Energy began a new phase in a dismal year for the company when it and 24 subsidiaries filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in federal courts. The company reiterated in a statement that it had sustained large losses in the third quarter due to the spike in corn prices last summer.

The company said that it would resume normal operations, would not scale back raw material purchases, would continue to pay suppliers as well as pledging not to interrupt payroll. “Today’s filing allows VeraSun to address its short-term liquidity constraints as we navigate historically challenging market conditions while we focus on restructuring to address the company’s long-term future,” Don Endres CEO said. “We appreciate the loyalty of our employees, customers and suppliers during this challenging time.”

Endres has not yet responded to a Digest request for an interview to address its investment outlook as well as confirming its short term commitments.

Greater Ohio Ethanol files Chapter 11 bankruptcyIn Ohio, the Greater Ohio Ethanol Plant has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection for its 54 Mgy corn ethanol plant in Lima. The company said that they hope to continue running while reorganizing…
Gateway Ethanol files for Chapter 11 bankruptcyIn Kansas, Gateway Ethanol filed for Chapter 11 reorganization, stating that it owed creditors between $50 and $100 million. Previously, Dougherty Funding had requested courts to establish an emergenc…
Beatrice Biodiesel parent files for bankruptcy; 50 Mgy plant now controlled by AgStar Financial ServicesIn Nebraska, the parent company of the 50 Mgy Beatrice Biodiesel plant in Beatrice filed for Chapter 7 (liquidation) bankruptcy, handing control of the plant to AgStar Financial Services. Agri Energ…
Bioenergy of America Chapter 11 restructuring collapses; heads for liquidationIn New Jersey, a federal bankruptcy judge dismissed the Chapter 11 case of Bioenergy of America after the company was unable to pay administrative expenses associated with continued operation and the …
Bioenergy of America files for bankruptcy as feedstock costs bite; former industry giant falls as Europe’s Biodiesel Corp avoids similar fate in debt-for-equity swapIn New Jersey, Bioenergy of America filed for bankruptcy yesterday, listing assets of $1-$10 million and debts of $10-$50 million. The company represented 15 percent of US biodiesel supply in 2005, ha…
Ethanex Energy files for bankruptcy; cancels Nebraska acquisitionIn Kansas, Ethanex Energy filed for bankruptcy after failing to raise $1.5 million in interim financing for a planned $220 million, three-plant acquisition in Nebraska”…. Written by Jim Lane ·

By: Smokey

Smokey — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 03:24:58 +0000

Ric Werme, Thanks for that interesting information. Everything you've posted above leads us to one inescapable conclusion: there is no need whatsoever for a taxpayer-funded "Sustainability Taskforce." Dr. Stemen undoubtedly means well, but he is on the wrong track. The free market is already providing the answers, at competitive prices. And companies pay taxes on their profits; bureaucrats collect taxes to pay themselves. Government isn't the solution, it is the problem. That's not thinking 'outside the box.' It's just rational thinking.