The last time we discussed biofuels I stated ethanol takes more energy to produce than it contains. Since then I've seen some evidence to the contrary, but I've also seen reports like
this:
Quote:
|
Figures from the [North Dakota] state Commerce Department show North Dakota`s two newest ethanol plants have collected nearly 1.8 million dollars in state subsidies over the past six months.
|
If they are producing energy, why do they need tax dollars?
Taxes are also be spent on
algae and
fungi.
If any of these paths to bio fuels show promise, they don't need tax dollars. They will attract private and corporate investment on their own merits. If they have no merit, they don't need tax dollars.
Personally, I would like to see them all successfully produce fuel. And then I would expect to see the investors rewarded for their efforts and risks. And I would like to afford their product, and not have been taxed into poverty, unable to repair the flat tires on my bicycle.
Get the government out of the way and allow our economy to grow. Energy, like education, trade, food, health care, etc is too important to entrust to our government.
Linear Mode
