November 17, 2008
Posted by FoulHooked at 10:15 PM
November 14, 2008
It's a very important skill when fishing. One of the more easily discernable (from the surface) places to likely find fish is along "foam" or "bubble" lines, where current seams trap and hold bubbles formed by turbulent water upstream. How'd you like to fish this foam line?
Posted by FoulHooked at 10:29 AM
November 13, 2008
November 12, 2008
November 6, 2008
Less than 3 weeks before new Killers. I'm such a homer. I can't get the new single out of my head, so I'll give it to you as well if you haven't heard it.
Baltimore for the weekend. Leaving early tomorrow. It's gonna be weird not standing in the Salmon River at 7 Sunday morning for only the second time in 5 weeks. "Wave goodbye, wish me well."
Posted by FoulHooked at 10:11 AM
November 5, 2008
November 4, 2008
...alcohol is for drinking!
I bet you thought this was gonna be an election-related post.
Gee...who ever would have thought ethanol-as-energy investments would be failing? (free registration req'd for full article, via Ted Williams)
I'll give you a hint...he's got two thumbs....
From the article:
Six of the biggest publicly traded US ethanol producers have lost more than $8.7bn in market value since the peak of the boom in mid-2006....
Ouch...but that's nothing compared to what you've lost....
Investor losses come as taxpayers have paid billions to support the ethanol industry. More than $11.2bn has been spent since 2005 on tax breaks for companies that blend ethanol into petrol. Billions more have been spent on direct state and federal subsidies for US ethanol production.
“We’re looking at an industry that’s cost $80bn to get to this point,” said Bob Starkey, a fuels analyst at Jim Jordan & Associates, a research group in Houston.
Hmmm...eh, it's just money. Money that continues to flow from your pocket to a failing industry built on a flawed rationale; one which private investors are running from despite it's massive subsidies. I would hope $80B is the going rate for an invalid fledgling, but something tells me we still have more to pay before people back down.
...ethanol has disappointed many who saw it as a wonder product that could reduce the US’s dependence on foreign oil while cutting down on pollution. Worse, a growing number of influential critics now say ethanol is helping raise the price of food.
Hmmm...where have I seen these issues before...?
And yet, people continue to deny, deny, deny;
“I’d challenge you to find any energy resource today that isn’t dependent on government support,” [Renewable Fuels Association's] Mr [Bob] Dinneen said. “If domestically produced energy is something that you want to have, then some of these subsidies are going to be necessary.”
That just doesn't sound...correct? Google, help me out.
Oil industry subsidies for dummies
The study estimates that the federal government has provided $725 billion in energy subsidies (including R&D funding and tax breaks) over the last 50 years. The biggest beneficiaries? The oil and gas industry. That’s right. Oil and gas got 60% of that $725 billion. Next in line is coal at 13%, followed by hydropower at 11%. Nukes come in at 9%, while renewables got only 6% — just one tenth of the largess showed on oil and gas.
Okay, that's a pretty good start. So, renewables have only been getting 6% (well...plus hydro...ooops, forgot to include that in renewable?)...but keep in mind that is over the past 50 years. The actual study can be found here. Let's take a look at my favorite non-renewable energy (the atom) vs. ethanol, shall we...
From Energy from Thorium;
...most of the so-called research subsidy to the "nuclear industry", was not focused on conventional power reactor technologies. Only $5.8 billion was spent on light-water reactors, the only civilian nuclear technology used to generate power in the United States.
...only 6% ($1.68 Billion) of Federal nuclear research dollars since 1976 have been spent on light-water reactor research, despite the fact that light-water reactors provide 20% of power in the United States.
...I wonder how much ethanol provides. Now, here it comes...
Unlike all other energy sources there has never been a tax-based subsidy for the nuclear industry. In contrast, renewables as well as oil, gas, and other energy forms receive heavy tax subsidies. Most of the cost of hydro construction is paid for by the Federal government with no return to the tax payers. Most energy forms have received more money from the Federal Government than they have paid to it. The one exception is the civilian nuclear industry, which has paid $14 billion more to the Government that it has received.
Oh snap! We've given over $11 billion in never-to-be-seen-again tax breaks just over the last 3 years to companies that mix ethanol into your gas (someone could pay me to pour white lightening into my tank any day, who needs the middle-man?), while nuclear has been paying us back in full...and then some!? What are we? Stupid?
Granted, there's a lot to take into consideration...there is no silver bullet...but there does appear to be more than a hint of promise for a cheap, domestic supply of energy from a current technology, wouldn't you say? Let's hope someone smarter than I has been keeping track of this.
Posted by FoulHooked at 4:59 PM