BUSHED! | Episode One And Two
Tune In Every Night To Olbermann On MSNBC
Tullycast
Busting The Ethanol Myth
StoriesFrom PERMACULTURE
Myth #1: It Takes More Energy to Produce Ethanol than You Get from It!
Most ethanol research over the past 25 years has been on the topic of energy returned on energy invested (EROEI). Public discussion has been dominated by the American Petroleum Institute’s aggressive distribution of the work of Cornell professor David Pimentel and his numerous, deeply flawed studies. Pimentel stands virtually alone in portraying alcohol as having a negative EROEI—producing less energy than is used in its production.
In fact, it’s oil that has a negative EROEI. Because oil is both the raw material and the energy source for production of gasoline, it comes out to about 20% negative. That’s just common sense; some of the oil is itself used up in the process of refining and delivering it (from the Persian Gulf, a distance of 11,000 miles in tanker travel).
The most exhaustive study on ethanol’s EROEI, by Isaias de Carvalho Macedo, shows an alcohol energy return of more than eight units of output for every unit of input—and this study accounts for everything right down to smelting the ore to make the steel for tractors.
But perhaps more important than EROEI is the energy return on fossil fuel input. Using this criterion, the energy returned from alcohol fuel per fossil energy input is much higher. In a system that supplies almost all of its energy from biomass, the ratio of return could be positive by hundreds to one.
Myth #2: There Isn’t Enough Land to Grow Crops for Both Food and Fuel!
According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the U.S. has 434,164,946 acres of “cropland”—land that is able to be worked in an industrial fashion (monoculture). This is the prime, level, and generally deep agricultural soil. In addition to cropland, the U.S. has 939,279,056 acres of “farmland.” This land is also good for agriculture, but it’s not as level and the soil not as deep. Additionally, there is a vast amount of acreage—swamps, arid or sloped land, even rivers, oceans, and ponds—that the USDA doesn’t count as cropland or farmland, but which is still suitable for growing specialized energy crops.
Of its nearly half a billion acres of prime cropland, the U.S. uses only 72.1 million acres for corn in an average year. The land used for corn takes up only 16.6% of our prime cropland, and only 7.45% of our total agricultural land.
Even if, for alcohol production, we used only what the USDA considers prime flat cropland, we would still have to produce only 368.5 gallons of alcohol per acre to meet 100% of the demand for transportation fuel at today’s levels. Corn could easily produce this level—and a wide variety of standard crops yield up to triple this. Plus, of course, the potential alcohol production from cellulose could dwarf all other crops.
Myth #3: Ethanol’s an Ecological Nightmare!
You’d be hard-pressed to find another route that so elegantly ties the solutions to the problems as does growing our own energy. Far from destroying the land and ecology, a permaculture ethanol solution will vastly improve soil fertility each year.
The real ecological nightmare is industrial agriculture. Switching to organic-style crop rotation will cut energy use on farms by a third or more: no more petroleum-based herbicides, pesticides, or chemical fertilizers. Fertilizer needs can be served either by applying the byproducts left over from the alcohol manufacturing process directly to the soil, or by first running the byproducts through animals as feed.
Myth #4: It’s Food Versus Fuel—We Should Be Growing Crops for Starving Masses, Not Cars!
Humankind has barely begun to work on designing farming as a method of harvesting solar energy for multiple uses. Given the massive potential for polyculture yields, monoculture-study dismissals of ethanol production seem silly when viewed from economic, energetic, or ecological perspectives.
Because the U.S. grows a lot of it, corn has become the primary crop used in making ethanol here. This is supposedly controversial, since corn is identified as a staple food in poverty-stricken parts of the world. But 87% of the U.S. corn crop is fed to animals. In most years, the U.S. sends close to 20% of its corn to other countries. While it is assumed that these exports could feed most of the hungry in the world, the corn is actually sold to wealthy nations to fatten their livestock. Plus, virtually no impoverished nation will accept our corn, even when it is offered as charity, due to its being genetically modified and therefore unfit for human consumption.
Also, fermenting the corn to alcohol results in more meat than if you fed the corn directly to the cattle. We can actually increase the meat supply by first processing corn into alcohol, which only takes 28% of the starch, leaving all the protein and fat, creating a higher-quality animal feed than the original corn.
Myth #5: Big Corporations Get All Those Ethanol Subsidies, and
Taxpayers Get Nothing in Return!
Between 1968 and 2000, oil companies received subsidies of $149.6 billion, compared to ethanol’s paltry $116.6 million. The subsidies alcohol did receive have worked extremely well in bringing maturity to the industry. Farmer-owned cooperatives now produce the majority of alcohol fuel in the U.S. Farmer-owners pay themselves premium prices for their corn and then pay themselves a dividend on the alcohol profit.
The increased economic activity derived from alcohol fuel production has turned out to be crucial to the survival of noncorporate farmers, and the amounts of money they spend in their communities on goods and services and taxes for schools have been much higher in areas with an ethanol plant. Plus, between $3 and $6 in tax receipts are generated for every dollar of ethanol subsidy. The rate of return can be much higher in rural communities, where re-spending within the community produces a multiplier factor of up to 22 times for each
alcohol fuel subsidy dollar.
Myth #6: Ethanol Doesn’t Improve Global Warming! In Fact, It Pollutes the Air!
Alcohol fuel has been added to gasoline to reduce virtually every class of air pollution. Adding as little as 5–10% alcohol can reduce carbon monoxide from gasoline exhaust dramatically. When using pure alcohol, the reductions in all three of the major pollutants—carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and hydrocarbons—are so great that, in many cases, the remaining emissions are unmeasurably small. Reductions of more than 90% over gasoline emissions in all categories have been routinely documented for straight alcohol fuel.
It is true that when certain chemicals are included in gasoline, addition of alcohol at 2–20% of the blend can cause a reaction that makes these chemicals more volatile and evaporative. But it’s not the ethanol that’s the problem; it’s the gasoline.
Alcohol carries none of the heavy metals and sulfuric acid that gasoline and diesel exhausts do. And straight ethanol’s evaporative emissions are dramatically lower than gasoline’s, no more toxic than what you’d find in the air of your local bar.
As for global warming, the production and use of alcohol neither reduces nor increases the atmosphere’s CO2. In a properly designed system, the amount of CO2 and water emitted during fermentation and from exhaust is precisely the amount of both chemicals that the next year’s crop of fuel plants needs to make the same amount of fuel once again.
Alcohol fuel production actually lets us reduce carbon dioxide emissions, since the growing of plants ties up many times more carbon dioxide than is created in the production and use of the alcohol. Converting from a hydrocarbon to a carbohydrate economy could quickly reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide.
More Douchebag Brits (Pt 867)
StoriesFrom The Beeb’s Blogs
The Democrats’ debate in Las Vegas was interesting. I loved the introduction of a heckler in the early stages – presumably paid for by CNN to give the whole thing a less plastic feel.
On substance: I will leave the discussion of Hillary Clinton’s asbestos pant-suit to other, less salubrious outlets. But it seems to me that the Democrats, all of them, are entering potentially hazardous ground on Iraq. It was striking that they talked, all of them, about ending the war. They used that word: ending. They did not use the word with the same number of syllables but an altogether different feel: winning. Now, a few months ago the E word sounded just fine to most Americans and the W word rather unrealistic, even idiotic and insulting. But now?
Politics is about narrative and the narrative at the moment is of a war that is no longer out of control. It could, of course, go downhill again rapidly but at the moment it is not. For the Democrats, isn’t this is a trap even bigger than driving licences for illegal immigrants? Might they not sleepwalk into calling for a war to end that is actually being won?
And a word to CNN: years ago at my English boarding school we were told not to be boastful. Referring to your talented and thoughtful team of commentators and reporters as “the best political team on television” or whatever the precise phrase is, demeans them and you. After all, this is the “best website in cyberspace” and I am the “best BBC reporter writing this blog” but neither piece of information is interesting or validating unless it comes from others. The willingness of Americans to be proud of their achievements and unashamed to trumpet them is – in my humble view – a hugely attractive trait. But CNN has gone too far…
UPDATE:: What a coinkidink-just found this
Don Imus’ Simulcast Turns Into Simulcrash
StoriesNY Daily News.
<!–Posted on 05 Dec 2007–>
Just
24 hours after Don Imus put his show back on track, he got blindsided
Tuesday by one of the ugliest technical train wrecks in recent radio
and TV memory.
On their first day in a new studio set up for the RFD-TV simulcast
of his WABC (770 AM) radio show, Imus and his team found much of their
equipment didn’t work properly through the first half of the show.
Clearly furious, Imus refrained from a major outburst even after he
had to postpone and then shorten a phone interview with columnist Tom
Friedman because the phone connection at first didn’t work at all
and then made Friedman sound like he was speaking from a mine shaft.
Similar problems recurred with other guests and cast members. At
times, Imus and his in-house team couldn’t communicate with
engineer Lou Ruffino at WABC across the street.
At one point, Imus had Charles McCord read news headlines, while
Imus tried to contact Ruffino on a cell phone. While McCord read the
news, Imus could be heard in the background trying to resolve the
problem.
“It was certainly embarrassing,” said Tom Taylor, editor
of the trade site Radio-Info.com. “Such displays don’t make
anybody look good – including Imus himself, who has nothing to do with
the technical end.”
“It wasn’t one of our finest moments,” said WABC
program director Phil Boyce. “Complicating it is that because
this was just his second show for us, we had no backup tape to put on
while we worked to fix it.
“Fortunately, I believe we did fix it. We were on it all day and I don’t think it will happen again.”
Some radio people wondered why Imus didn’t do the show from
WABC until the RFD studio was fully tested. But that could have killed
the TV simulcast.
RFD was not available for comment. But Imus vowed to Friedman the
problems would not recur. Imus also joked, “I’ve had eight
months to work on controlling my temper,” suggesting the day was
testing that resolve.
Other news for Imus yesterday was better. While radio does not have
overnight ratings, his return Monday drew a lot of attention and
generally good reviews. A number of major advertisers were also back,
including Hackensack Medical Center, Bigelow Tea, NetJet and Mohegan
Sun.
Taylor said he’s confident this was a one-day disaster.
“Phil and his folks are sharp,” he said. “They’ll figure it out.”
– By David Hinckly
Powered by ScribeFire.
Time magazine refused to publish responses to Klein's false smears
Stories 
Joe Klein is Losing it…..
(updated below)The disgraceful behavior of Time Magazine in the Joe Klein scandal has been well-documented. But new facts have emerged that reveal that Time‘s behavior was far worse than previously thought.
First, Sen. Russ Feingold submitted a letter to Time protesting the false statements in Klein’s article. But Time refused to publish it. Sen. Feingold’s spokesman said that the letter “was submitted to TIME very shortly after Klein’s column ran but the letters department was about as responsive as the column was accurate.”
Just to reveal how corrupt that behavior is, The Chicago Tribune — which previously published the factually false excerpts of Klein’s column and then clearly retracted them — yesterday published Feingold’s letter. As Feingold details — but had to go to the Chicago Tribune‘s Letter section to do it — “Klein calls the Democrats’ position on reforming the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act ‘well beyond stupid’ but without getting his facts straight.” Feingold also said that “Klein is also flat out wrong” in his false claims that there was some “bipartisan agreement” on a bill to vest “new surveillance powers” that House Democrats ignored.
Second, Rep. Rush Holt — before he published his response in The Huffington Post detailing Klein’s false claims — asked that he be given the opportunity to respond to Klein’s false column directly on Time‘s Swampland, where Klein was in the process of making all sorts of statements compounding his errors. But Time also denied Rep. Holt the opportunity to bring his response to the attention of Time‘s readers.
According to Zach Goldberg, Rep. Holt’s spokesman: “Rep. Holt had an email exchange with Mr. Klein about FISA and his column. During the exchange, Rep. Holt made a request to respond with a Swampland post to clarify what is really in the RESTORE Act. Mr. Klein noted he already issued a public apology and did not accept the request.”
Let’s just ponder for a second how lowly Time‘s behavior here is. It refused the requests of two sitting members of Congress, both of whom are members of the Intelligence Committees and have played a central role in drafting the pending FISA legislation, to correct Klein’s false statements in Time itself. What kind of magazine smears its targets with patently false statements and then blocks them from responding?
Making matters much worse is the fact that, as we now know, Klein’s false statements about the House Democrats’ FISA bill was basically ghost-written by GOP Rep. Pete Hoekstra. Klein never quoted a single Democratic proponent of that bill — either in his original false article, his multiple Swampland posts, nor the three separate “corrections” published by Time.
The whole episode was a GOP-fueled smear on Democrats. Yet Time nonetheless refused to allow Congressional Democrats with the greatest knowledge of this matter to bring to the attention of Time‘s readers how false Klein’s statements were, and how false the subsequent “corrections” were. To describe Time‘s behavior is to illustrate how profoundly unethical it is.
Third, at least 100 individuals wrote letters to Time‘s editors protesting Klein’s article and responding to its claims. I know this because that’s how many people (at least) cc’d me on their letters, forwarded them to me, and/or copied their Letters to the Editor in the Comment section here. Managing Editor Rick Stengel’s voice mail and email box overflowed with responses.
Nonetheless, Time — while publishing 15 separate letters on a whole array of topics in its print edition this week — did not see fit to publish a single letter about the Klein falsehoods. At every step, they sought to hide from their readers — and continue to hide from their readers — just how outrageous and severe were Klein’s false statements by suppressing all responses.
Finally, Howard Kurtz of The Washington Post and CNN — who dives head-first into every right-wing blog controversy — has been completely mute about the Klein/Time scandal, even though it was one of the central focuses of blogs for more than a full week and relates directly to the media criticism issues he is ostensibly assigned to cover. Worse, Kurtz has now been asked about this matter by multiple readers in two consecutive weekly Monday chats he hosts at the Post, but has refused to take a single question about it.
Yesterday, at least 15 people submitted questions to Kurtz on the Time/Klein scandal — again, I know this because that’s how many people emailed me their questions or left them in comments — and not a single one was chosen. Kurtz, however, found time to address multiple questions on such pressing matters as the new Don Imus Show and football.
It’s hardly difficult to understand why Kurtz has joined with the Time editors to steadfastly suppress any effort to expose the behavior of Klein and Time:
Time published blatantly false statements from Klein, refused (and refuses) to retract them, and then bolstered those false claims with a further false claim that Klein had a solid basis for making them. Worse still, they refused to allow even a Senator and a Congressman on the Intelligence Committees — who were the targets of Klein’s smears — to defend themselves and explain in Time why Klein’s accusations were false.
And they (and their corporate minions such as Kurtz) are taking every step possible to ensure that their readers never become aware of what happened. Is it time yet to hear more about how dangerous bloggers are because they operate with no standards?
UPDATE: I just learned that in addition to all of the above, a letter was also sent to Time jointly from House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes. Although they communicated with Time in advance and advised them that the letter was coming, Time has not published this letter either.
Prior to posting this, I asked Time to comment on these matters and was told they “will get back to [me] as soon as possible.” I wasn’t interested in waiting longer, so I sent the Time PR person a link to this column and advised her that “unlike Time, I’m happy to post a comment in response to this.” If and when I receive a response from Time, I will post it.
Don Imus Rises From The Dead In New York City
Bartlett, Broadcatching, Broadway, Carville, Dierdre Imus, Dodd, Film and Video, Hillary, Imus, Kids With Cancer, Matalin, McCain, McCord, McGuirk, MSNBC, Neocon, New York, New York City, Obama, Ruffino, Town Hall, Tullycast, WABCWhat a surreal day
John Donald was low-key. Very.
Awkward silence between segments (Rob?) everybody on stage at first apprehensive.
Opening like a sitcom with each cast-member introduced.
McCain put the bad-breath infused middle aged white-boy majority to S L E E P. (prattling on about “winning” and “surrender” and ” liberal” move-on Democrats)
Mr. Imus: I’m back and Dick Cheney is still a war criminal and Hillary Clinton is still Satan
Such a jackass panderer sometimes but I’m real glad he’s back.
(Gift-bags were a joke -going to give to ebay charity and glad to donate the 100$ ticket price to little kids with cancer.
JT
IMUS in the Morning Network Show Clock
Stories
John Donald Imus Back On The Air
Bartlett, Broadcatching, Carville, Dierdre Imus, Imus, Kids With Cancer, McCord, McGuirk, MSNBC, New York, New York City, Ruffino, Town Hall, Tullycast, WABC
1. CBC.ca Arts – Rural-targeted TV network picks up forthcoming Imus radio show
2. E! News – Imus Back on TV in the Morning
3. FMQB: Radio Industry News, Music Industry Updates, Arbitron Ratings, Music News and more!
4. Radio Ink – The Voice of Radio Revolution
5. Imus Returning to TV on RFD-TV – 11/14/2007 1:09:00 PM – Broadcasting & Cable
6. Celebrity News – Imus Back on the Airwaves, and on the Tube
7. Don Imus Comes Home to RFD-TV – Press Release
8. It’s Official: RFD-TV HD to Air Imus In the Morning
9. Media Blog – Mixed Media by Jeff Bercovici: Imus Is Back, and So Are His Buds – Portfolio.com
10. RFD finds home for Don Imus – Entertainment News, Radio News, Media – Variety
11. mediabistro.com: FishbowlNY
12. Rural Media Tunes In to Imus
13. 6abc.com: Imus Returning to TV, Too
14. New Yorkers will need satellite to see TV simulcast of Don Imus’ return to radio
15. RFD-TV Lands Imus Simulcast – 11/14/2007 7:20:00 AM – Multichannel News
16. The Associated Press: Don Imus Also Returning to Television
17. Don Imus returning to television on RFD-TV – BloggingStocks
::BREAKING:: BROADWAY STRIKE IS OVER::
Broadcatching, Broadway, Hollywood, Local 1, New York, Producers, stagehands, Theatre, Tullycast, UnionThe union reaches agreement with theater owners and producers after a 12-hour session.
NEW YORK — A crippling strike that had shut down most Broadway shows
in the heart of the holiday season ended late Wednesday night as
striking stagehands finally hammered out a new contract with theater
owners and producers.The strike, which had entered its 19th day and drained millions of
dollars in revenue from the theater district, was settled after a
12-hour bargaining session that had begun Wednesday morning between the
League of American Theaters and Producers and members of Local 1,
representing about 3,000 stagehands.
“We are pleased to announce that we have a tentative agreement
with Local 1 ending the Broadway strike,” said Charlotte St. Martin,
the league’s executive director. “The agreement is a good compromise
that serves our industry. The most important thing is that Broadway’s
lights will once again be shining.”
St. Martin, who emerged to cheers from the Midtown law offices where
negotiations had been held since Monday, announced that the 26 Broadway
shows temporarily shuttered by the strike would resume performances
today. Plans have yet to be announced, however, for new shows whose
openings were delayed, including “The Little Mermaid” and “The
Farnsworth Invention.”
As he left the final bargaining session, Local 1 President James
Claffey held up one finger signaling victory, and stagehands gathered
outside broke into cheers. “Brothers and sisters of Local 1, you
represent yourselves, and your families and your union proud,” he said.
“That’s enough said, right there.”
Few observers expected the strike to last as long as it did, recalling
that Broadway’s last strike, a 2003 work stoppage by musicians, was
settled in four days. But both sides dug in their heels, even as the
strike all but wiped out the lucrative Thanksgiving holiday week, which
has traditionally been Broadway’s second most profitable week of the
year.
Nine shows were able to remain open during the strike, because they had
signed separate labor agreements with Local 1. But most other Broadway
productions, plus restaurants, tourist shops, parking garages and other
businesses in the theater district, took a major economic hit.
Prominent local restaurants, such as Sardi’s, said their business had
fallen off 30% to 35%. New York officials estimated the strike was
costing the city $2 million a day.
It was not clear how the work stoppage would affect shows that had been
struggling at the box office. But several productions that had been
thriving announced plans to lure customers back immediately: Producers
for “Chicago” announced they would offer all remaining tickets to
tonight’s performance for $26.50. Tickets for the show typically cost
as much as $111.50.
“We’re so happy that this is over,” said Bruce Cohen, a spokesman for
the union. “Now everyone should go back to work — and everyone should
go see a Broadway show.”
None of the principals would comment on the terms of tentative
settlement, which must be ratified by the local union, a branch of the
International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees, within 10 days.
The key sticking points had focused on the number of stagehands
required to work on Broadway shows.
From the beginning, the league had argued that the previous
contract, which expired July 31, had required it to hire too many
employees, an arrangement that some likened to featherbedding.
But Local 1 members contended that the league’s proposed cutbacks threatened workplace safety and jeopardized hard-won jobs.
In recent days, sources close to the negotiations said both sides had
found common ground on the most contentious issue, involving the
“load-in” period, when stagehands install a new show in a theater. One
by one, the talks resolved other issues, including the question of
“continuity pay,” for those periods when stagehands work before and
after their scheduled work shifts, as well as the amount of a wage
increase being sought by the union.
Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, whose offer to help mediate the strike was
twice declined by Local 1, hailed the settlement as “great news,”
expressing the hope that the industry would recover in time for the
upcoming holidays.
John Connelly, president of the local Actor’s Equity, told reporters
that news of the settlement was announced during the curtain calls for
Wednesday night’s performance of “Young Frankenstein.”
The audience broke into enthusiastic applause, he said, adding: “I know
that I speak for everyone when I say, I couldn’t be happier.”
Powered by ScribeFire.
The New York Herald Sun 