Wind Farms Kill More Wildlife Than BP (NYSE:BP) Oil Spill ... Far More

The hype and media hysteria surrounding the BP (NYSE:BP) has been so out of proportion to reality, it's embarrassing to those who repeatedly made it sound like it was environmental armageddon, when in fact it was relatively mild and much of the response to the fears caused it to have more more impact than it would have if responses were based on facts and not fear driven.

Although people with agendas are attempting to resurrect the doomsday scenario, it's too late. The facts are in and the Gulf oil spill simply wasn't that bad, and if people would have heeded the reality that they could go to beaches in the Gulf and vacation there, the tourism industry wouldn't have been near as effected as it has been.

One thing to point out is the attempt to make it look like a slaughter for wildlife and birds, which after combing the region, found under 3,000, and as a recent article in Time magazine pointed out, less than half of them had proof of the oil spill being the cause of their deaths.

Now compare that with the killer windmills in the country, which are alleged to be friendly. Just one forest of windfarms in Washington state kills over 7,000 birds and 3,000 bats every year. Multiply that times the number of windfarms there are in the U.S., and you have a true disaster from these murderous, inefficient and ugly monstrosities.

Where is the call to investigate this outrage? How about prosecutions and media coverage of this disaster. As long as it's a politically correct energy source it doesn't matter how many birds, bats or animals they kill, as long as it appears to be green. What we're finding out, as with corn-based ethanol, is green is mean, and we need to stand up and start fighting against this hidden menace.

The government even offers tons of subsidies for these initiatives, which require huge amounts of inputs, along with the killing of hundreds of thousands of birds and bats annually.

We need to tear those things down and rid the land of them. Selling the materials which made the windmills would go a long way toward recouping some of the costs, and would rid the land of those hideous contraptions.

How is this different from BP and the oil industry, which has caused far less damage over decades than the wind and ethanol industries, which couldn't survive without taxpayers dollars?

It isn't! Let's get the pictures of the torn apart birds and mounds of bats out to the public and see how they respond to their tax dollars at work.

Let's also continue to expose the enormous inputs it takes to develop the corn-based ethanol industry, which even many environmentalist don't back and recognize as one of the worst solutions out there for alternative energy.

The Gulf has been found to be much more resilient and able to clean itself than people thought. But how do we clean the land of windfarms? How does nature deal with them.

Even former oil energy investors are in it just for the money, and not because they actually believe these forms of energy are better for us. They know what the consequences of using them are, but just keep touting it as clean energy and harmless to the environment, in spite of evidence to the contrary.

Since they are causing far more damage than the BP oil spill ever will, and you could include other spill as well, it's a serious question to ponder as to its negative impact for people of integrity, as it's hypocritical to demonize the oil industry when the so-called green industry is anything but.

Speaking of hypocrisy, look at the joke at Berkeley, where they receive millions in funding from BP in order to pursue targeted studies. The liberal bastion is living a lie, and even though a small number of people attempted to eliminate the financing, Berkeley showed its true colors by rejecting that and continuing on with its relationship with BP.

This doesn't bother me at all, but it does show the tremendous lie behind the many people and institutions positioning themselves and environmentalists, when they're far from it, and have as many ties to traditional energy industries as anyone else does.

Add to that the destructive forces these cruel, "green" energy sources release, and you see a completely different picture than the narrative the mainstream media attempts to portray.

September Corn Futures Up on Perceived Demand

Several factors have been moving the price of grains lately, not the least of which has been dry and hot weather in the western and eastern portions of the Midwest in the United States. That has resulted in corn prices going higher, as uncertainty concerning the needed rain and if it'll come remains.

But corn has been unwound some from its grain cousins, with the ethanol factor being always in play, as well as the growing demand from China. Both of these are been increasing in 2010.

Recent data from the USDA shows there was less corn acreage planted than originally estimated, and production estimates were also lowered on July 9 by almost 1 percent, to 13,245 billion bushels. The corn production estimate cut came from the corn acreage report.

Even so, we're still on a production course to reach record highs this year, which means there is a lot of optimism concerning surging demand.

Another factor on the negative side, as far as corn prices go, is the possibility of cutting the ethanol subsidy program, which has increasingly come under fire for its costs and controversy over damage to power equipment and some cars, as well as the environment.

The budget crisis and outrageous spending of the Obama administration has led us to that place.

There is mounting pressure to eliminate the ethanol tax subsidies, and even proponents are talking of cutting it by 9 cents from the current 45 cents a gallon, to possibly 36 cents a gallon for the subsidy.

Past Time to Drop the Ethanol Subsidies

While there should have never been subsidies for ethanol, now that the billions in tax credits are about to run out, we should just fold it up and let ethanol stand on its own.

If the market wants it, they'll pay for it, if not, let it fall by the wayside, and something propped up by the government which the public rejects, is throwing money down a black hole, never to return, or give a return.

At this time, close to $6 billion is offered in subsidies for ethanol, all via tax credits. That equals 45 cents a gallon.

As critics of the industry rightly note, if they can't stand on their own after 30 years, it's a complete waste of taxpayer dollars, and of course it is.

Ethanol has been known for years to destroy small power equipment like chainsaws and numerous others, making it highly costly in that regard as well.

The problem is, some groups are calling for the subsidies to stop, but then putting the money into other stupid initiatives like flex-fuel cars and other dubious products.

Let the market decide, along with the creative flow of business, which always creates the best and most innovative products and services we use.

We also need to limit the size of government, so the need, not only to get rid of this ineffective tax credit needs to be put in play, but also to keep the money off the table for anything else, and let business and the market decide what they want.

Some lawmakers say it would hurt the industry if they did that, but if it did, there is no real ethanol industry, but a government-propped entity sucking of the blood of taxpayer money.

This is no different than the apparent shocking surprise that the economy isn't' growing in America. Any honest and informed person knew that.

The government pouring billions into it to give the appearance of growth is all that was, even though the mainstream media reported the fantasy as a reality.

Now they're backpedaling as they know people are seeing the false undergirdings of a illusory recovery which never even created a job, but made it appear things were improving.

That's the same with ethanol. There's no foundation there, and we need to remove the foolish laws forcing the blend in gasoline to increase, continuing to reinforce a so-called fuel source very few people want.