With the price of oil at $110 per barrell, and gas expected to be close to $4 per gallon in the near future, expect to hear plenty of talk about alternative fuels in the coming months. Although there are many options such as plug-in hybrids, solar powered, and even compressed air, the one you will hear the most about is unfortunately the least effective solution.

Corn based ethanol is the leading contender to replace oil based gasoline in the coming years, to the delight of American farmers. Indeed on the surface, the idea of the countries fuel supply being provided by American farmers is something all Americans can feel good about, particularly after decades of watching the Saudis and other foreign countries get rich off our addiction to oil. Americans are demanding a change, and our government has granted it to them.

The Energy Policy Act of 2005 madates an increase in the amount of biofuel which must be mixed with gasoline sold in the United States. As I have said with regards to Barack Obama’s calls for “change”, not all change is good and this is a prime example. The Washington Times has an editorial today detailing the negatives of corn based ethanol:

Ethanol is 20 to 30 percent less efficient than gasoline, making it more expensive per highway mile. It takes 450 pounds of corn to produce the ethanol to fill one SUV tank. That’s enough corn to feed one person for a year. Plus, it takes more than one gallon of fossil fuel — oil and natural gas — to produce one gallon of ethanol. After all, corn must be grown, fertilized, harvested and trucked to ethanol producers — all of which are fuel-using activities. And it takes 1,700 gallons of water to produce one gallon of ethanol. On top of all this, if our total annual corn output were put to ethanol production, it would reduce gasoline consumption by 10 or 12 percent.

Ethanol production has driven up the prices of corn-fed livestock, such as beef, chicken and dairy products, and products made from corn, such as cereals. As a result of higher demand for corn, other grain prices, such as soybean and wheat, have risen dramatically. The U.S. position as the world’s largest grain producer and exporter means the ethanol-induced higher grain prices will have a worldwide impact on food prices.

It’s easy to understand how the public, looking for cheaper gasoline, can be taken in by the call for increased ethanol usage. But politicians, corn farmers and ethanol producers know they are running a cruel hoax on the American consumer. They are in it for the money. The top leader in the ethanol hoax is Archer Daniels Midland (ADM), the country’s largest producer of ethanol. Ethanol producers and the farm lobby have pressured farm state congressmen into believing it would be political suicide if they didn’t support subsidized ethanol production. That’s the stick. Campaign contributions play the role of the carrot.

Due to increasing demands for corn based ethanol, the price of corn has shot up from around $2 per bushel in 2004 to almost $6 per bushel now. Many anaylsts suggest this dramatic rise in price will convince farmers to use more of their land for corn production as oppossed to other crops, thereby raising the prices of those crops due to the decreasing supply. This may also drive up the price of meat as well as corn is primarily used as animal feed.

While it is clear that new energy sources will be necessary in the coming years, I find it foolish to sacrifice the nations food supply in order to accomplish this.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Congress, Features, Global Warming, Politics, Taxes