<Key Questions on Energy OptionsThe Oil DrumThe Future of (Natural) Gas from the Western Canada Sedimentary Basin?>
<DrumBeat: January 24, 2007DrumBeatDrumBeat: January 26, 2007>

319 comments on DrumBeat: January 25, 2007

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

dmathew1 on January 25, 2007 - 11:04pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Hello Everyone,

I have a question addressed to The Oil Drum's Editors (sort of like asking God a question, I know ...):

When you allowed Robert Rapier to become a prominent contributor at The Oil Drum you did know that he is employed as a lobbyist for a major oil corporation, right?

I had to look into this myself since I had formed my opinion of Mr. Rapier intuitively simply by reading his posts. I never actually researched it until today. Using a simple Google search I found the evidence:

Robert Rapier, Chemical Engineer, Conoco-Philips, Billings, handed out "The Cost of Grain-Derived Ethanol." He said that he worked on Bio-Mass to Ethanol in graduate school and believes that Montana has a lot of potential for producing alternative energy sources.

Mr. Rapier did not believe that corn Ethanol is a viable alternative. He referred to a 2002 United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) study that found there is a 34% energy gain when making corn-based Ethanol, which amounts to 21,000 BTUs gained for one gallon of Ethanol produced. There are 125,000 BTUs in a gallon of gasoline, and six gallons of Ethanol would have to be produced to displace a one gallon of gasoline. With a $.51 Federal subsidy and a $.20 proposed State subsidy, consumers would be paying $4.25 to displace a single gallon of gasoline based on USDA studies and $33.81 per million BTUs. Mr. Rapier stated that the cost of natural gas is $7.00/million BTUs. The subsidy on wind power is $5.00/million BTUs. He said that is what Montanans should be going after.

Mr. Rapier asked, "Do you think that constituents understand that bringing mandated Ethanol to Montana means that they will pay $4.25 to displace a single gallon of gasoline?" He read the response from the USDA when he questioned the amount: "If we want to produce fuel Ethanol from bio mass and crop residues then Ethanol should compete with gasoline on the BTU bases. We do not have the technology yet, but in the future it is a possibility." He said that is what he concluded ten years ago. He said he will be available for questions and noted that the USDA report is referenced and goes into more detail in his handout.
http://data.opi.state.mt.us/legbills/2005/Minutes/House/Exhibits/agh63a0...
{Tape: 1; Side: B; Approx. Time Counter: 16.8 - 23.3}

[As referenced here: http://www.logicalscience.com/energy/quotes.html ]

I fear that anointing an oil lobbyist the primary authority regarding ethanol on the Oil Drum constitutes some sort of ethical violation. Would the editors kindly justify this decision and, more importantly, never explicitly identifying Robert Rapier as a lobbyist employed by an oil corporation?

David Mathews
http://www.geocities.com/dmathew1

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
peakearl on January 26, 2007 - 12:44am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Any of us following TOD for any period of time knows he's employed by an oil company. So what?
If you have a quarrel with his data you are free to challenge it here.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
expat on January 26, 2007 - 12:59am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

In Trollheim, it is the next day - 'ethical violation'?

I guess you approve of the name 'Self-aggrandized Trader' then, but I am not sure that OilCEO is actually an oil CEO - another case of what? Apart from 'so what,' that is.

Please, get some sort of perspective - I do not belong to a peak oil movement, and this is a forum - which means anyone who can type is allowed a soapbox, which other people then ignore.

Oh - to use something I'm sure you would approve - in the interest of 'full disclosure' - I am an expat, but that can be read a couple of ways - care to offer any insight which ones are not ethical violations?

The editors don't care, since they have better things to do with their time.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Jack on January 26, 2007 - 1:18am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Robert has been very clear that he works for an oil company since day one. He has also described his position as being other than a "lobbyist" as you claim three times in your rant.

I suggest that you document this claim, or apologize.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Lipstick Jihad on January 27, 2007 - 2:58am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

I agree, Jack.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Franz on January 26, 2007 - 2:33am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Robert is an authority by force of argument. Everyone here knows he works for the oil industry. What he says stands on its merits, even when it is unpopular (see the debate with WT, which has gone over the heads of most people posting here).

You are asking for trouble if you think you can easily win an argument with RR. Or perhaps you are banking on the fact that he will be too busy settling into a new role in Scotland to bother replying...

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
dmathew1 on January 26, 2007 - 7:43am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Hello Franz,

Robert is an authority by force of argument. Everyone here knows he works for the oil industry. What he says stands on its merits, even when it is unpopular (see the debate with WT, which has gone over the heads of most people posting here).

You are asking for trouble if you think you can easily win an argument with RR. Or perhaps you are banking on the fact that he will be too busy settling into a new role in Scotland to bother replying...

I have no quarrel with Robet Rapier's argument against ethanol. What I am pointing out is that The Oil Drum is functioning as a lobbying - public relations device for the oil industry. His presence and prominence indicate that The Oil Drum itself is a website which is working on behalf of the oil industry.

If Robert Rapier is lobbying on behalf of the oil corporations, how many other people here are doing the same? Was The Oil Drum established specifically for the purpose of lobbying on behalf of the oil industry?

How can anyone trust anything said on The Oil Drum if the website serves only as a tool of propaganda on behalf of big oil?

David Mathews
http://www.geocities.com/dmathew1

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.