Kevin Drum: "As practically everyone except politicians pandering their way through Iowa knows, corn ethanol is a boondoggle. It doesn't do much to reduce oil use, it doesn't do much for the environment, and it doesn't do much for your food bill. All it does is make corn farmers happy." Indeed. In a lot of ways, the most impressive thing about Bill Richardson's energy speech is that he managed to get through the whole thing without mentioning ethanol.
« Minority Report | Main | The Energy Security Myth »
Corn Ethanol
17 May 2007 03:30 pm
Comments (12)
If Iowa wasn't an early primary no Democratic candidate would probably ever mention ethanol or any other agricultural subsidy given farmers tend to vote Republican.
I think that in the last election cycle the biggest donor group by employer to the donks was Harvard University. Did he get through the speech without mentioning higher education subsidies?
Since corn farming has already been dependent on subsidies for decades, is it really a big gain for them (corn farmers), or does it just shift subsidies?
Think all the things associated with farming - stock of fertilizer and agricultural machinery companies are going through the roof - not to mention companies like ADM. It is very good for corporate America. And it's not just corn farmers - because so much acreage is being devoted to corn (the most since WWII), less is being planted of other crops and so their prices are now up too. It's win-win if you're into the supply side of things
Too bad reality shot his thesis full of holes. Since reaching a high in February, corn prices have dropped $1.25 a bushel. That's more than half of the 2006 price run up everyone has been so worried about. And in that time, ethanol production has continued to climb. An ag economist told me the price increases were due more to a diversification move into commodity futures by hedge funds in 2006 than ethanol production.
Lakes of high-fructose corn syrup, boondoggle ethanol, and a latent fear of black people: yup, that's Iowa.
And suddenly we realise another reason why Richardson isn't in the top 3...
A good question for Dem and GOP candidates would be whether they would support dropping the 54-cent-per-gallon tariff on Brazilian sugar can-based ethanol. That's one practical step that would reduce gasoline costs for those on the East Coast, since the Brazilians can produce and ship sugar cane-based ethanol here at a cost of about $1.50 per gallon -- much less than it costs to produce and ship corn-based ethanol to the East Coast.
The key is higher fuel-efficiency standards. If we could just get on board with where the Japanese and Germans are moving in this regard, we'd be on the right track. Trying to wake up Detroit is pretty much impossible.
I live in Illinois where there are lots of stations that sell E85. people have been using ethanol for quite awhile here and it is saving and good.
Plus not all pols are doing it to pander to Iowa. some are doing it with Illinois. lol.
Actually, here there are businesses that are depending on this. It will bring jobs to the midwest and it cannot be outsourced to India. and with demand, it will pay a living wage. It helps the farmers and it is a good source of alternative fuel.
the ones who are dismissing ethanol are those who do not live in the midwest and have no direct dealing with it as in using it.
Yeah, the fact that Brazil achieved energy independence through the use of Ethanol proves it couldn't work!
Lakes of high-fructose corn syrup, boondoggle ethanol, and a latent fear of black people: yup, that's Iowa.
WTF? Do you have any evidence whatsoever that Iowa has a "latent fear of black people"? As a Black Iowan I've never experienced or even heard of anything that would suggest that exists, and I've lived here all my life.
Also this bizarre fear of corn syrup is about as rational as Korean belief in "fan death" (look it up). HCFS is 50% fructose, and 50% glucose. Table sugar (sucrose) breaks down to 50% sucrose and 50% glucose in the stomach, before it enters the blood stream. The chemicals are exactly the same.
Let's ask every candidate: “do you think the 54 cents per gallon tariff on cheaper imported ethanol should be eliminated? If not, can you explain to American taxpayers why the resulting higher prices for oil would be beneficial for them?"
Amani Elobeid and Simla Tokgoz prepared a study estimating that removing the tariffs would reduce the price of gasoline by 14%. Here's some more links about that .
Comments closed May 31, 2007.
| 
Heads in the Sand
M, have you seen the really signifcant news today:
http://blogs.usatoday.com/popcandy/2007/05/rip_veronica_ma.html?csp=34
Veronica Mars has been canceled :(
Posted by trza | May 17, 2007 3:37 PM