|
June, 2005
Farmers win, the consumer at the pump wins, our nation's
relief from the grip of the oil cartels wins, even the Florida
and Gulf coast sugar industry wins if we follow and expand
a tested and successful model.
Where’s that model? Quick, show me. That sounds like
a national headline instead of a Saturday ho-hum article
buried in the Washington Post.
Yeah, the model is Brazil.
Brazil? Isn’t that in South America, that long, skinny
country that covers almost the entire west coast? No,
that’s
Chile. Brazil is the big hunk of the country with a seashore
on the east coast, home to the Amazon rain forest and Rio
de Janeiro. Enough geography . . .
Brazil is a sugar-cane growing country and the cane industry
fluctuates wildly depending on world sugar markets, plus the fact that it’s an absolutely terrible place for
people to work. That, plus the high prices and diminishing
oil resources worldwide, plus the fact that cane (along with
corn, soybeans, beets, cornstalks and grass) is an easy ethanol
source, plus the fact that ethanol runs fine in cars, plus the fact that it’s thirty or forty cents a gallon cheaper
at the pumps, makes for a lot of pluses.
And a long list of perceived, but narrow-interest negatives:
- Exxon and the boys aren’t really wired with
that mind-set and so they keep on throwing money at Washington
to keep
renewable energy from happening.
- Too disturbing to Shell
et al profit structures
- Too much capital investment in old
technologies
- What are we gonna do with all those drill-rigs
and the prepaid bribes to various thugs around the world?
- What
do we do with tanker fleets?
- No one at my country club even
knows a cane-sugar grower.
- Does the Middle East
matter without oil? Okay, that one’s
not narrow interest.
Of course change will come, but only after we’ve dirtied-up
the remaining pristine areas of the world, steam-rollered
human rights in favor of petro-dollars in a few more of the ‘stans,’ further
poisoned the politics of the have-nots in favor of the
haves and warmed the planet to near extinction. We're currently mining oil in Canada.
All of the above have a dollar value, but they are intrinsically
life-style values. It’s been an observation of mine
that life-style has yet to yield to profit and this has
made of me an advocate of follow-the-money when chasing
bad guys
and offer-the-money when enticing behavior.
With this in mind, I suggest administrations present and
future offer outrageously advantageous tax breaks to Big
Oil to refashion itself as Big Biofuel. I know it’s
not a catchy name, but giving away most of the American West
got the railroads built and they didn’t have a motto
either, unless it was “Moving the Indians to
Build California.”
- Thus will poor agricultural societies in temperate
zones become less poor, growing various crops that are
convertible to ethanol and thus will the increasing thirst
(and ability
to pay for) private automobiles be counterbalanced by
environmentally sensitive fuels.
- Tanker owners can transport
fuel instead of crude, as there’ll
always be an imbalance between those who produce and
those who consume.
- Oil rigs can be left to rust, dismantled
for scrap or painted silly colors and declared art objects.
- The Middle East can once again become a nomadic land
and sleep for an additional two thousand years.
Brazil’s Agriculture Minister said if the U.S. would
open their markets by lowering tariffs and promoting flexible-fuel
engine packages, they would contribute to both world prosperity
and peace. Yet my newspaper said that efforts to gain wide
acceptance for biofuels in America have faced political,
economic and technical obstacles not present in Brazil. And
I guess that’s right. The moneyed interests in Brazil
want it and those in America don’t.
It’s probably a deal-breaker.
Get out of the Archives and read what Jim's writing
today |