ETHANOL BOONDOGGLE

February 28, 2011

The Great Ethanol Boondoggle!

Have you noticed lately that when you put gas into your car the pump often has a label that states; “Contains no more than 10% ethanol. 

U.S. ethanol is distilled almost exclusively from corn, and receives a 45 cent federal subsidy per gallon. All taxpayers pay for this subsidy which was over $6 billion last year. Our government also charges tariffs of 54 cents per gallon on imported ethanol to protect the domestic producers from price competition.

The idea of producing fuel for our autos from renewable non-oil sources sounds great doesn’t it?

Consider: The U.S. grows over half of the world’s corn. Annually 20% of this corn is exported, mainly to the poorer African and East Asian countries where it is used for foods. This year alone it is estimated that over 40% of all U.S. corn will be used to produce ethanol. The ethanol led change in the end-use of the corn has incredible side-effects; 1. The smaller amount of corn and by-products available for livestock feed and other food products (roughly about 25% of all food products in the typical food market contain some corn byproducts) has increased costs for these products. 2. The amount of land being re-directed to grow the subsidized, and more profitable, corn takes away land available to grow other crops, which also raises costs for these products. 3. The practice of repeated single-crop growing requires an increased amount of oil based fertilizers to allow corn to be replanted year after year. 4. Last year alone a 20% reduction in exported corn had the effect of increasing food prices in the poorer countries by up to 75% and led directly to increased starvation.

Here are some additional side-effects; Ethanol as a fuel is only 70% as efficient as gasoline. Currently a blend of 10% ethanol with 90% gasoline (E-10) approved by the EPA will reduce gas mileage by a small but meaningful percentage when applied to the billions of gallons consumed annually. The cost of producing ethanol…when you consider the oil needed to make the fertilizer, fuel for farm machinery, fuel in trucks used to transport the grain to the distillers, energy required to fuel the distilleries, fuel in trucks to transport the ethanol to refinery/blenders (ethanol cannot be shipped via pipeline), energy to run the refinery…results in total energy usage greater than any savings. The nature of ethanol which causes it to burn hotter than gasoline results in possible damage to small engines such as in lawnmowers, etc. Finally, the second largest ethanol producer in the world is Brazil which uses sugar cane to make this biofuel. The land being used to grow the sugar cane has now almost completely finished eliminating the Atlantic rain forest. This has also resulted in huge displacements of cattle ranching and other crops to the Amazon rain forest which is continuing to lose forests at a rate that will likely result in an environmental catastrophe of epic proportions. In Brazil, the energy costs of converting sugar cane to ethanol are as high as those for the U.S. corn based processes. Even worse, the millions of acres of sugar cane land have to be surface burned after each harvest to eliminate the stubble that remains. This causes air pollution to further harm the environment.

It’s impossible to find merit for this idea. The only folks who benefit are those raising corn, or sugar cane, the distillers who make ethanol, the blenders, and of course, the politicians who are either pandering for farmer’s votes or persuaded by the lobbyists for these powerful interests to pass the laws and regulations that are so costly and harmful to the average American…let alone the citizens of the poorer countries. Even Al Gore, who was one of the earliest supporters, recanted on his support for the current ethanol technology late last year.

None of this is new information. It has been widely understood for the past few years. How has our government responded? Late last year the EPA approved increasing the limits of ethanol to 15% in each gallon of gasoline, and Congress voted to extend the subsidies and tariffs at their current rates.

Are our collective leaders from both parties all so stupid or selfish that they simply don’t understand how wrong this is on every level imaginable?

It seems obvious that we are rapidly approaching a crisis as demand for oil far outstrips supply. Of course we must look for alternative fuels. However, using fuels made from foodstuffs and other crops that end up using more energy than it saves and even possibly increasing pollution isn’t the right alternative. The price of gasoline will continue to be driven higher by the economics of supply/demand. That will eventually force all consumers to change the way they consume this energy product. We will all have to learn to use less fuel by driving more efficient cars, increased car-pooling, and more mass transit. Our elected leaders need to be leading the charge for these truly necessary changes…not continuing to support and even encourage the current fairy tale that we can solve our energy crisis and reduce pollution at no real costs. There are no free lunches! Personally I think we just have to keep booting the old guard from both parties out until the newly elected finally prove by their actions that they understand the right things to do!

As usual, these are just my opinions. What do you think?

Mike Tower

Hendersonville, NC

Please visit:  


Citizens Against Politics As Usual
http://capau.org


Lee's Political Opinion
http"://leespoliticalopinion.blogspot.com