With Food Costs Rising, Lawmakers Debate the Benefits of Ethanol

[Pale Rider]

With Food Costs Rising, Lawmakers Debate the Benefits of Ethanol

Tuesday, May 06, 2008

WASHINGTON — Just months ago, ethanol was the Holy Grail to energy independence and a "green fuel" that would help nudge the country away from climate changing fossil energy.

Democrats and Republicans cheered its benefits as Congress directed a fivefold increase in ethanol use as a motor fuel. President Bush called it key to his strategy to cut gasoline use by 20 percent by 2010.

But now with skyrocketing food costs -- even U.S. senators are complaining about seeing shocking prices at the supermarket -- and hunger spreading across the globe, some lawmakers are wondering if they made a mistake.

"Our enthusiasm for corn ethanol deserves a second look. That's all I'm saying, a second look," said Rep. Jane Harman, D-Calif., at a House hearing Tuesday where the impact of ethanol on soaring food costs was given a wide airing.

The dramatic reversal has stunned ethanol producers and its supporters in Washington as they have seen their product shift from being an object of praise to one of derision.

Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, one of the Senate's two working farmers and a longtime ethanol booster, said he finds it hard to believe that ethanol could be "clobbered the way it's being clobbered right now" over the issue of food costs. What does the cost of corn have to do with the price of wheat or rice, he is telling people.

The uproar over ethanol is clearly gaining momentum.

The governor of Texas and 26 senators, including the GOP's presumptive presidential nominee John McCain, are asking the Environmental Protection Agency to cut this year's requirement for 9 billion gallons of corn ethanol in half to ease, they say, food costs. Connecticut's governor recently asked Congress to temporary waive the requirement.

Article continues here...

[avatar4321]

stupid people. what's to debate? It sucks. If they could make ethanol without affecting the food supply then maybe it wouldnt be so bad but they cant turn so much of the food supply into energy and not expect bad circumstances.

[Pale Rider]

stupid people. what's to debate? It sucks. If they could make ethanol without affecting the food supply then maybe it wouldnt be so bad but they cant turn so much of the food supply into energy and not expect bad circumstances.

I know this, you know this... why is it always so freaking hard for Washington to get it?

[avatar4321]

I know this, you know this... why is it always so freaking hard for Washington to get it?

i dont think its that they dont get it. I think they just have other priorities... IE $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[Hagbard Celine]

Silly rabbit. Ethanol can be made from anything fermentable. Grass, sugar, corn, leaves. Pretty much anything green. What's there to debate? Brazil is already leading the world in production of this stuff and they don't make it from corn.

[MtnBiker]

Silly rabbit. Ethanol can be made from anything fermentable. Grass, sugar, corn, leaves. Pretty much anything green. What's there to debate? Brazil is already leading the world in production of this stuff and they don't make it from corn.

Brazil is using sugar cane to make their ethanol. It is not just about the plant material. Considerations also need to be made in the resources needed to make ethanol, the land, the water, the harvesting requirements and what are the oppurtunity costs to the food supply when such resources are used to make fuel rather than food. Also consider how much engery it takes to make energy, corn and sugar cane ethanol require heating to start the fermentation process, so it takes energy to make energy. Enzyme based ethanol, such as grass may be more feasible. So yes, there is plenty to debate, nothing silly about it.

[PostmodernProphet]

so it takes energy to make energy

you don't think it takes energy to refine oil?....besides, the real benefit of biofuels is that we aren't shipping our money to Venezuela or Saudi Arabia to fuel our cars......

[avatar4321]

you don't think it takes energy to refine oil?....besides, the real benefit of biofuels is that we aren't shipping our money to Venezuela or Saudi Arabia to fuel our cars......

no we are just starving people.

[actsnoblemartin]

and the world.

according to the I.M.F.

no we are just starving people.

[glockmail]

you don't think it takes energy to refine oil?....besides, the real benefit of biofuels is that we aren't shipping our money to Venezuela or Saudi Arabia to fuel our cars......

It takes about 4 gallons of ethanol to make 5 gallons of ethanol. The efficiency with crude oil to fuel products is much, much higher.

[PostmodernProphet]

no we are just starving people.

are you taking the position then that farmers should be forced to go back to the days when they were earning $1.97 a bushel for corn so that the poor of the world should be allowed to eat?....do you realize that until ethanol came around, the farmers WERE the poor of the world, trying to make a living in 2004 on the same price per bushel that they received in 1979?....and surviving only with federal subsidies?.......if you want to feed the poor, shell out a twenty and buy three or four bushels of corn for them, don't expect the farmers to foot the bill for you......

[PostmodernProphet]

It takes about 4 gallons of ethanol to make 5 gallons of ethanol. The efficiency with crude oil to fuel products is much, much higher.

so what....you take a barrel of oil out of the ground and burn it, it is gone forever.....you grow a couple hundred bushels of corn or a few acres of switch grass and turn it into ethanol and you do it again next year.....besides, bio-fuels will create tens of thousands of jobs in the US building and running refineries, etc.....

[MtnBiker]

you don't think it takes energy to refine oil?....

Where exactly did I make any reference to oil production?

[glockmail]

so what....you take a barrel of oil out of the ground and burn it, it is gone forever.....you grow a couple hundred bushels of corn or a few acres of switch grass and turn it into ethanol and you do it again next year.....besides, bio-fuels will create tens of thousands of jobs in the US building and running refineries, etc.....

I'm not against them, I just don't think that they should be subsidized or mandated. Let the market decide what fuel is best and most efficient, whatever. I am also not against using taxes and tarrifs on each product to reflect its true cost. For instance, high tarrifs on OPEC oil to pay for all the shit we have to do in the Middle East, like fighting wars and protecting Israel from former camel jokeys who can now affford Russian weaponry.

[MtnBiker]

bio-fuels will create tens of thousands of jobs in the US building and running refineries, etc.....

That same logic could be applied to oil refineries as well.