Ronald Bailey | November 7, 2006
There are significant trade-offs, however, involved in the massive expansion of the production of corn and other crops for fuel. Chief among these would be a shift of major amounts of the world’s food supply to fuel use when significant elements of the human population remains ill-fed.
Even without ethanol, the world is facing a clash between food and forests.... Ethanol mandates may force the local loss of many wildlife species, and perhaps trigger some species extinctions. Soil erosion will increase radically as large quantities of low-quality land are put into fuel crops on steep slopes and in drought-prone regions.
As I've asked before, if
ethanol makes such economic sense, why does it need federal
subsidies or even worse, a California initiative to subsidize venture
capitalists?
Disclosure: As far as I know, I own no stocks in any ethanol
producing companies. But I do ocassionally drink immoderate amounts
of ethanol in the form of Lagavulin.
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
I am opposed to ethanol derived from corn as it will drive up the price of my drinks. ;}
Even without ethanol, the world is facing a clash between
food and forests
Bullshit. Modern ag technology has increased productivity enough so
that vast tracts of former farmland in this country have reverted
to a state of nature.
This also ignores all the development going into creating new breeds of grass that can grow in otherwise unfarmable arid land, as well as being readily converted to ethanol and/or biodiesel.
The problem of world hunger does not, and will not, come down to 'too little corn'
Haven't you heard: ethanol is the answer to all our energy
problems. Actually it's the answer to all our problems.
Using ethanol will lead us down the primrose path to a modern-day
Utopia where there's a chicken in every pot, two girls for every
boy, where men are men, sheep are nervous, the children are all
above average, every dog has his day, and life ain't nothin' but a
funny, funny riddle...
...at least that's what they're telling us here in North Dakota.
And they wouldn't lie to us...would they?
"As I've asked before, if ethanol makes such economic sense, why
does it need federal subsidies or even worse, a California
initiative to subsidize venture capitalists?"
by the implied logic, nothing should ever need subsidies. I don't
think that is true, and I don't think that Ron believes that,
although he's free to correct me.
ethanol MAY make economic sense when the technology is perfected.
cellulosic ethanol is probably the way to go.
any venture capitalists interested in my bio-hydrogen idea and want
to fund my research, let me know.
Ethanol--like wind, solar, hydro, and geothermal energy--has a
place in the local energy mix...like the "I" states where it's
grown. It's a local supplement, not a global replacement, to
existing energy sources.
Besides, what are all those beef cows going to eat? Feedlots, not
parking lots, are the real competition for corn-based ethanol.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245