The Ethanol Papers - Paperturn manuscript - Flipbook - Page 563
I clearly acknowledge that my pro-ethanol arguments follow a consistent pattern; a pattern that is not just consistent in how I respond, but in how other
ethanol proponents make their case for ethanol. Indeed, the single most important reason that I purchased a dedicated CNG-powered vehicle and then a
non-flex fuel gasoline-powered vehicle was so that I could experience firsthand
the benefits or problems, if any, in using CNG or ethanol.
This goes back to what I wrote earlier: I find it crucially important to have personal hands-on experience. I was never comfortable in just repeating what
someone else said about an alternative energy solution, I felt I must live it. I’ve
done it, and continue doing it with various high-level ethanol-gasoline blends in
a wide variety of vehicles, and in particular, with the testing I’ve done in my own
dedicated non-flex fuel vehicle over a long term. I wondered if Bryce would respond to my email by saying that he arrived at his conclusions because he tried
using various ethanol-gasoline blends in his personal vehicle(s) and that by doing so that he “wrecked” the engines, just as the oil industry claims have
warned. He offered no insight into any personal experimentation one way or the
other in the email, and none in the book.
In wrapping up this particular section let me say this: The email I received from
Edelman was not sent to me exclusively, nor is it the first time that they and
others in the oil lobby have sent such messages to journalists and media personalities. It is a normal part of their propaganda efforts. As Robert Rapier confirmed to me in a phone conversation I had with him last Fall, he used to receive
informational messages like this from the Big Oil propaganda machine, and that
if he was to write an article that contained the information, and get it published,
that there would be some financial remuneration for doing so. I believe that
there is a great likelihood that Bryce has received anti-ethanol information
points from the oil lobby, even though he says he hasn’t. Frankly, it’s irrelevant
because the truthful and factual responses to the anti-ethanol points are the
same either way.
MOVING FORWARD
Moving past the opening praise pages, expressions of gratitude, and acknowledgments, Bryce’s next couple of chapters treat us to a sermon he titled “WHY
WE THINK WE WANT ENERGY INDEPENDENCE.”
Or let me suggest another title that he could have used, “Why struggle with
freedom when slavery has so much to offer?”
