The “Property Rights Round-Up” protest against the use of eminent domain to build private, for-profit carbon dioxide pipelines takes place at the State Capitol in Pierre today at noon. Right-wing Big Ag propagandist Amanda Radke is telling everyone in the Midwest to show up:
Rookie Representative Karla Lems (R-16/Canton) says over a hundred landowners in South Dakota have been served condemnation letters by the big Republican CO2 pipeliners trying to seize their property. Farmers whose land is being taken away have shown historically that they may respond with violence.
Yet strangely, while Rapid City leaders put the city on red alert when Indians planned a peaceful march on July 4 to ask for justice on their stolen land, Pierre leaders seem not to have sounded any alarms about the gathering of (mostly white) farmers and legislators trying to stop a contemporary land heist. I’m even willing to speculate that far more of the protestors gathering in Pierre today will be packing heat than were the protestors who marched downtown in Rapid City Tuesday. But the City of Pierre seems unconcerned, happily-go-luckily promoting its hydrant parties and reëstablished frisbee golf course and vanquishing of curly pondweed.
I guess threat perception varies depending on the similarity of affiliation and coloration of the protestors and the leaders of the communities where they plan to protest.
I didn’t know they were already condemning land for this project. Unbelievable for a project that doesn’t do much good or put a real dent in carbon emissions and does nothing for the public.
Just stop ethanol production. Problem solved.
Wait until the storage facility leaks. It will eventually leak.
And to close, give me free money to run some pipe. I will just float it up the Missouri River.
Thank you SX123 for the prompt. Your ideas are always appreciated.
– There are several reasons why subsidizing ethanol production should be ended:
1. Inefficient use of resources: Ethanol production heavily relies on crops such as corn, which consumes significant amounts of land, water, and energy resources. This can lead to the diversion of resources from other vital areas, such as food production, resulting in higher prices for staple crops and potential food shortages. Ending subsidies would encourage a more efficient allocation of resources.
2. Environmental impact: Ethanol production, especially when derived from corn, has been criticized for its negative environmental impact. The process requires the use of large quantities of water and often involves the use of fertilizers and pesticides, which can contribute to water pollution and soil degradation. Furthermore, the increased demand for corn cultivation can lead to deforestation and habitat destruction. Phasing out subsidies would reduce the incentives for environmentally harmful practices.
3. Market distortion: Subsidies create an artificial advantage for ethanol producers, distorting market dynamics. By providing subsidies, the government is essentially picking winners and losers, favoring ethanol production over other forms of renewable energy. This can hinder innovation and the development of more sustainable and efficient alternatives. Ending subsidies would allow for a more level playing field and encourage competition and diversification in the renewable energy sector.
4. Cost to taxpayers: Subsidizing ethanol production involves significant costs to taxpayers. These subsidies are typically funded by government budgets or through taxes and can create an unnecessary burden on public finances. By ending subsidies, public resources could be directed towards more pressing needs, such as healthcare, education, and infrastructure.
5. Technological advancements: Ethanol production technology has been evolving rapidly, with the development of more advanced biofuel options. By ending subsidies, the industry would be incentivized to invest in research and development to improve efficiency, reduce environmental impact, and explore alternative sources of biofuel. This would ultimately lead to more sustainable and cost-effective solutions for renewable energy production.
In conclusion, ending subsidies for ethanol production would promote the efficient use of resources, reduce negative environmental impacts, eliminate market distortions, alleviate the cost burden on taxpayers, and encourage technological advancements in the renewable energy sector.
I’m just wondering if the farmers have a permit.
While opinions on ethanol production can vary, and Mr. P.h always takes a narrow libbie view, here are some reasons that some people believe ethanol production is bad:
Food vs. Fuel Debate: One common criticism is the concern that ethanol production diverts agricultural resources away from food production. Critics argue that using crops like corn or sugarcane for ethanol production can contribute to higher food prices and potentially lead to food shortages, particularly in developing countries where food security is a concern.
Environmental Impact: Ethanol production is often associated with intensive farming practices, which can have negative environmental consequences. These practices include deforestation, increased pesticide and fertilizer use, and soil erosion. Additionally, the energy-intensive processes involved in producing ethanol can contribute to greenhouse gas emissions and other forms of pollution.
Land Use and Biodiversity: Critics argue that expanding ethanol production requires large amounts of land, which can lead to the conversion of forests or natural habitats into agricultural areas. This conversion can result in the loss of biodiversity and disruption of ecosystems.
Water Usage: Ethanol production is a water-intensive process, requiring significant amounts of water for crop irrigation and processing. This can strain local water resources and lead to environmental issues such as water scarcity and contamination.
Energy Efficiency: Some critics question the overall energy efficiency of ethanol production. The process of growing crops, converting them into ethanol, and transporting the fuel can require a substantial amount of energy, which may outweigh the energy benefits gained from using ethanol as a biofuel.
Here are some reasons that some people believe ethanol production is a wonderful furry beast, licking the soles of Mr. P.h’s dirty hippy feet:
Renewable Energy Source: Ethanol is considered a renewable fuel because it is primarily derived from plant-based sources such as corn, sugarcane, or cellulosic biomass. Unlike finite fossil fuels, ethanol can be continually produced from renewable resources, reducing dependence on non-renewable energy sources and contributing to energy security.
Lower Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Ethanol has the potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions compared to traditional fossil fuels. When burned, ethanol generally releases fewer carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, which contribute to climate change. It can serve as a cleaner-burning alternative to gasoline, thus helping to mitigate the environmental impact of transportation.
Economic Benefits: Ethanol production can have positive economic impacts. It supports the agricultural sector by creating demand for crops used in ethanol production, providing farmers with additional income opportunities. It also stimulates rural economies, creating jobs in farming, biofuel production, transportation, and related industries.
Energy Independence and Security: By promoting domestic ethanol production, countries can reduce their dependence on imported oil. This enhances energy independence, reduces vulnerability to oil price fluctuations and supply disruptions, and contributes to national energy security.
Technological Advancements: Ethanol production has driven innovation and technological advancements. Research and development in the biofuel industry have focused on improving production efficiency, developing more sustainable feedstocks, and optimizing conversion processes. These advancements have the potential to further enhance the viability and sustainability of ethanol production.
It’s important to note that while these are some common concerns, the debate around ethanol production is complex and multifaceted. Different studies have been conducted by grudznick, and ongoing research and advancements aim to address these issues and improve the sustainability of ethanol production is something you can count on me to be on top of. #4Science.
Now that Dr. McT isn’t around you only have grudznick to be a scientist for you. Teach you to be mean to people, huh?
No livestream on their website that I can find.
grudznichts’ diaper breathed connie view is as big a farce as trickle down economics.
Noem apparently a no show.
Mr. Arndt–I don’t believe there is any such thing as a “protest” permit in Pierre. I think the police are informed and generally they turn out and direct traffic. The Capitol Rotunda is open to the public. There are Highway Patrolmen and DCI agents out and about, but I can’t remember them busting any heads or anything like that. This time of year the Capitol is pretty empty. After all, you can stage an impromptu Baton Twirling demonstration there on a moments notice.
Subsidizing ethanol production involves significant costs to taxpayers. These subsidies are typically funded by government budgets or through taxes and can create an unnecessary burden on public finances.
It’s about time South Dakota’s press investigates the collusion between the state and polluters instead of pandering to the South Dakota Republican Party as it destroys watersheds by deconstructing the Waters of the United States rule protected under the 1972 Clean Water Act. South Dakota will flout WOTUS until the cows come home unless or until downstream states cry foul.
But Republicans scream RIGHT TO LIFE for human blastocysts as environmental pollutants occur more frequently in the umbilical cord blood of infants and in baby poop then cry government overreach while Waters of the United States or WOTUS architects regroup pending a ruling in the Supreme Court of the United States and another round in Congress.
Forever chemicals are ubiquitous in South Dakota’s water supply, too.
https://www.usgs.gov/news/national-news-release/tap-water-study-detects-pfas-forever-chemicals-across-us
One bushel of corn requires 3000 gallons of water to produce.
So, South Dakota is sucking water from finite aquifers, causing irreversible harm to habitats to send subsidized ethanol to whereveros because capitalism.
Larry, please understand that a tremendous number of acres of corn
are not irrigated. Those acres depend on naturally occurring precipitation (rain).
I grew up on a farm outside Elkton, Ed. Lecture someone else.
In the 90s and 2000s my conservationist father wept as shelter belts were being cleared for center-pivot irrigation and as fossil water was being pumped from fragile aquifers for the industrial agriculture now killing his once-beloved Brookings County. Today the Chinese ring-necked pheasant isn’t wildlife but it is a canary in a chemically and genetically engineered corn mine.
When my dad visited us in Spearditch he always mused about how the best ag land in Lawrence County was being paved and worried that flooding could submerge parts of town. Guess what?
“They paved paradise and put up a parking lot
With a pink hotel, a boutique, and a swinging hot spot
… Don’t it always seem to go
That you don’t know what you got ’til it’s gone?
They paved paradise and put up a parking lot
… Ooh, bop-bop-bop
Ooh, bop-bop-bop (na-na-na-na-na)
… They took all the trees and put ’em in a tree museum
And they charged the people a dollar and a half to see them
No, no, no
… Don’t it always seem to go
That you don’t know what you got ’til it’s gone?
They paved paradise and put up a parking lot
… Ooh, bop-bop-bop
Ooh, bop-bop-bop (oh-oh, na-na-na-na-na)
… Hey, farmer, farmer, put away your DDT
I don’t care about spots on my apples
Leave me the birds and the bees
Please!
… Don’t it always seem to go
That you don’t know what you got ’til it’s gone?
They paved paradise to put up a parking lot
Hey, now, they paved paradise to put up a parking lot
… Ooh, bop-bop-bop (why not?)
Ooh, bop-bop-bop
… Listen, late last night, I heard the screen door sway
And a big yellow taxi took my girl away
Now, don’t it always seem to go
That you don’t know what you got ’til it’s gone?
They paved paradise to put up a parking lot
… Hey, now, now, don’t it always seem to go
That you don’t know what you got ’til it’s gone?
They paved paradise to put up a parking lot
Why not? They paved paradise to put up a parking lot
Hey, hey, hey, paved paradise to put up a parking lot
… Ooh, bop-bop-bop
Ooh, bop-bop-bop
… I don’t wanna give it, why you wanna give it?
Why you wanna give it all away? Hey, hey, hey
Now you wanna give it, ah, she wanna give it
‘Cause she’s giving it all away, now, now
I don’t wanna give it, why you wanna give it?
Why you wanna give it all away?
‘Cause you’re giving it all, giving it all away, yeah, yeah
… Why d’you want me?
Why do you want to…? (She’s giving it all away, hey, hey, hey)
La-la-la, la-la-la, la-la-la, la-la-la
Hey, paved paradise to put up a parking lot
La-la, la-la-la, na-na-na-na, na-na-na“
Good one, IP
It’s a scary time, P. The Mississippi is the third most polluted waterway in the United States and five of the tributaries of the Minnesota and Mississippi River system rise South Dakota where Big Stone Lake is filling with silt.
It’s funny because not more than three minutes after reading your post Joni’s song came on the radio. KOZT – the Coast https://www.kozt.com/
You can see the rally here. KELO reporter Bob Mercer said “several hundred” supporters filled the rotunda on floors 2-4. Presentations were all very good. The most interesting part was watching the GOP legislators behind the speakers make choices which lines they would applaud or stand back on.
https://rumble.com/v2yhsys-sd-farmers-rally-to-defend-property-rights-against-carbon-capture-pipeline.html
These folks are mostly Noem’s voters. They are angry and they’re not going away.
Tiling to drain wetlands then drilling for water barely suitable for irrigation. How insane is that?
I just checked the landlord’s corn is starting to tassel, July 6th. beenngetting timely rains, just not enough.
Mitchell is going to spend the equivalent of Denny Sanford’s legal fees to dredge a lake.
Ethanol is renewable for as long as we have natural gas for the nitrogen fertilizer.
Ethanol is essentially natural gas evolved through a convoluted process involving the sun, diesel, and farmers.
Lar, tell me that story again about why your pa had to visit you in Spearfish? The one you told around the campfire out by Orman.
Few sailors can fly a Hobie 16 across a prairie lake under a full moon on mushrooms in occupied South Dakota without feeling something.
Larry, are the center pivots no longer working?
I perused google maps and I couldn’t find one center pivot in the
Elkton area. Perhaps I didn’t look hard enough?
Good morning, Mr. Arndt. Pumping groundwater for irrigation created such salinity problems center-pivots were removed. In South Dakota growers need to apply to irrigate more than one acre of land and allows for up to 24 inches or two acre feet per acre but a permit can take years to be approved. Most East River aquifers are fully appropriated but are believed to be more sustainable. Older permits even allow for the pumping of surface water and in 2022 the state had 5,532 active irrigation permits on about 836,000 acres.
Thanks for the info, Larry.