As most of you know, I’ve never been a fan of corn-based ethanol. I think it is a perfect example of something rushed to market by politicians eager to please both the farm voters and the green lobbies. Now others are beginning to question corn-based ethanol as well.
In some states such as Missouri, the enthusiasm over corn-based ethanol was fueled by several politicians whose backers and families stood to profit significantly by producing ethanol. Now a Missouri House committee wants to consider whether to repeal this law, which has only been in effect for four months, because of its effect on food prices.
Proponents of the law say it was enacted because E10 saves money over gasoline. It may well have saved money at the pump due to government subsidies, but it degraded vehicle fuel economy in a time when we need to conserve every drop of fuel possible. It has also driven both food and cattle feed prices through the roof. By the way, the economic analysis that determined E10 would save money was funded by the Missouri Corn Merchandising Council.
Those legislators who oppose the ethanol mandate, including some who originally thought ethanol was a good idea, say it has destroyed prices in the food and cattle feed markets. Demand for corn is up 38 percent in the last two years, and food and feed prices are up approximately 20 percent according to the Department of Agriculture. Farmers are now planting 22 percent more corn than last year. Opponents now want to conduct an unbiased study to determine exactly how corn-based ethanol is affecting the state’s economy.
The governor, who has decided not to seek reelection, says that high food and cattle feed prices (he says the increase is only 4 percent) are not due to corn being grown for ethanol rather than food. He says it is a direct result of population growth in China.
This is the inevitable result when non-technical people make technical decisions. They don’t have the training to properly determine the best way forward when considering a myriad of options. Both our economy and our environment are too important to be left up to legislators, lobbyists and zealots.
The world is now turning against corn-based ethanol. Britain stated recently it will stop purchasing ethanol from the United States. Both Chavez in Venezuela and the prime minister of India call ethanol a “crime against humanity.” I can easily dismiss Chavez’s comments as the ravings of an idiot, but India has been a friend of the U.S. for years.
We need to allow scientists sufficient time and ample budgets to perfect the process of producing cellulosic ethanol. Only then can ethanol be produced from essentially “waste” materials on non-productive lands. Some experts have stated that 25 percent of our current gasoline demand could be met with cellulosic ethanol if the process were perfected. And remember, our gasoline demand is not increasing like diesel demand is.
In the Springfield, Mo. area we’ve had two devastating ice storms in the past two years. You wouldn’t believe the huge piles of tree limbs broken off as a result of these storms. So what did we do with these piles of tree limbs? We burned them! What a shame we weren’t smart enough to utilize them to produce ethanol.
Approximately 25 percent of the CO2 in the atmosphere is produced by cars and trucks; let’s hope we soon learn to rely on our scientists to recommend the best ways forward to avert future disasters such as this, instead of just wasting resources.
