The Los Angeles Times is going through probably the worst stretch in its entire history, stretching back well over a hundred years. But despite one setback after another on the news pages, it’s shown encouraging signs of life in its daily editorials, specifically a series called "A Warming World," which has brought great discernment and wisdom to the topics of nukes, a carbon tax, Kyoto, and now, ethanol.
Here’s the open:
‘Gasoline is going — alcohol is coming. And it’s coming to stay, too,
for it’s in unlimited supply. And we might as well get ready for it
now."
Those words might have come from President George W. Bush, or just
about any member of the U.S. Congress, or every major presidential
candidate from both parties. All are euphorically drunk on ethanol (a
fancy name for grain alcohol), seen as the miracle fuel that will
simultaneously solve our global warming problem and end our reliance on
foreign oil. Actually, though, they were uttered by automotive pioneer
Henry Ford nearly a century ago.
Ford might have been a visionary, but he was badly mistaken about ethanol. Unfortunately, so are Bush et al.
Alcohol is best taken in moderation, and that applies to cars as much
as people. Ethanol isn’t all hype — it’s a promising alternative fuel
that could stretch gasoline supplies and cut emissions. But as
politicians try to outdo one another by approving ever-bigger ethanol
subsidies, production mandates and research grants, few are considering
the environmental and economic effects of a massive, rapid rise in
ethanol production. These are so severe that unless the mania ends
soon, they could far outweigh any gains.
The rest is here. A debate on the same subject can be found in the august pages of Foreign Affairs, in which two economists conclude that not only will ethanol raise food prices worldwide, hurting the poor, but the subsidies given to corn in this country will surely discourage far more promising research into switchgrass, according to a summary at the WSJ’s Informed Reader blog.
This brings to mind the bogus push for "clean coal," which as the writers on Grist never fail to point out, would if implemented eliminate coal’s only signficant energy advantage — price.
Will the U.S. ever come up with an energy policy that actually makes sense?
Kit Stolz 