Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2007
7:11 PM
Subject: Ethanol policy - what a turkey
U.S. Ethanol policy – an Environmental
Albatross
"the
costs of the legislated ethanol mandate are substantial, while the benefits are
very small"
Ethanol is BIG LOSER
December
1, 2007
https://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=58981
By Ernest Istook
© 2007
Ethanol subsidies are raising our food prices –
dubbed the "Thanksgiving Tax" because it upped the cost we paid for
Thanksgiving dinner.
Turkey farmers need almost three pounds of corn for every pound of meat put
on the birds. But they must outbid those who buy up the corn to make ethanol,
thanks to a 51-cents-per-gallon ethanol tax credit and other federal
incentives.
America paid $69 million extra for our
Thanksgiving turkeys due to ethanol mandates. That's what
Joel Brandenberger of the National Turkey Federation
told a Heritage Foundation audience. But it's just a small part of what he
labeled the Thanksgiving Tax.
With almost a fourth of the corn crop
now diverted to ethanol,
it's costlier to feed the chickens, the hogs and the grain-fed cattle. Egg
prices are up. Corn meal, corn syrup, and even my personal favorite (popcorn!)
are pricier. So is almost all food, as other grains are in higher demand as a
substitute for corn.
Bottom line: America pays $9 billion a year
more for our food because of ethanol policy. The problem is
growing faster than any crop. A recent U.S.
Department of Agriculture report says farmers are planting more corn rather
than other grains, constantly reducing the supply and thus raising the price
for those crops. High grain costs are discouraging farmers from raising cattle
and other animals, thus further increasing meat and egg prices. The food
industry has a website
outlining the ripple effect on our groceries.
That's the bad news.
Now the worse news: Congress is about to
mandate that we triple the use of ethanol. So take all these extra costs and
multiply them by three or more.
Today's mandates already require gasoline sellers to blend in at least 5
billion gallons of ethanol a year. With a 51-cent-a-gallon subsidy, this costs
taxpayers $4.5 billion on top of higher food prices. Congress plans to triple
the mandate to 15 billion gallons a year. The House and Senate each have
already agreed on that as part of their energy bill, but the legislation is
still hung up in one of those Washington jaw-fests called a conference
committee.
That gives us time to think this through and also to consider the other
spin-offs from the ethanol mandate.
Environmentalists are starting to understand that more ethanol
requires more corn, which requires more arable land. For example, Brazil is cutting down more rain forests to meet its national
ethanol mandates. Incentives for other biofuels
make the clear-cutting even worse, since cellulose plants like switch grass
have less energy content than corn. They require eight times as many acres to
produce equivalent amounts of energy. One estimate says the pending energy bill
would require planting enough switch grass to cover the state of Ohio.
Fertilizing, harvesting and transporting
such quantities to an ethanol distillery is also
energy-intensive, dramatically reducing the supposed benefits to the
environment.
There's a basic truth that cannot be altered – each drop of crude oil has an energy content that far
surpasses the same amount of corn, switch grass or anything else.
As Scotty always said to Captain Kirk, "Ye cannot repeal the laws of
physics!" A gallon of ethanol can't take
you as far as a gallon of gasoline because there's less power in it.
Yet the current Congress won't agree to
let America produce more oil from places like Alaska or from offshore – or
let us build more refineries or nuclear power plants.
On the other hand, ethanol has a big and successful lobby. Having its
champion state, Iowa, as the first place to hold a presidential contest also
discourages contenders from picking a fight against ethanol.
As a Heritage
Foundation study concluded, the costs of the ethanol mandate are
substantial, while the benefits are small at best. We're paying the price with
tax money, with higher fuel prices and with higher food prices.
Yes, corn is great chicken feed. But the cost of ethanol is not. This Thanksgiving Tax is nothing to be thankful for.
Ernest Istook, a former U.S. congressman from Oklahoma, is a distinguished fellow at The Heritage Foundation.