Is Ethanol a Solution, or a Problem?

To the Editor:

In “The Great Corn Con” (Op-Ed, June 25), Steven Rattner claims that United States ethanol production makes food costlier and scarcer, pollutes the environment and drains the treasury. That is not the case.

While producing 13 billion gallons of ethanol last year, the American biofuels industry also generated 32.5 million metric tons of feed for cattle, pigs and poultry.

Mr. Rattner claims that ethanol “consumes vast quantities of water and increases smog.” In fact, using ethanol in gasoline has reduced smog-forming emissions by 25 percent since 1990 and results in a 48 to 59 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions compared with gasoline, according to a recent study.

Moreover, ethanol yields between 1.9 and 2.3 times as much energy as it takes to produce, and producing a gallon of ethanol requires about as much water as producing a gallon of gasoline.

In farming communities and factory towns far from Wall Street, the American ethanol industry supports some 400,000 jobs, contributes $53.6 billion to the gross domestic product, and pays $15 billion annually in federal and state taxes, far surpassing the cost of federal tax incentives for ethanol. Meanwhile, according to the Government Accountability Office, the oil industry has received over $130 billion in tax incentives over the past 30 years.

The United States ethanol industry is eager to discuss how to develop, produce and market the next generation of biofuels, made from plant and wood wastes and even municipal garbage.

BOB DINNEEN
Washington, June 27, 2011

The writer is president and chief executive of the Renewable Fuels Association, the trade association of the United States ethanol industry.

To the Editor:

The United States’ ethanol policy favoring the feeding of machines over people is shameful. Ethanol production from corn is energy-inefficient. Farm subsidies are an abuse.

Steven Rattner has it right. Why can’t the policy makers get it?

ELISHA GURFEIN
Wayne, N.J., June 25, 2011

The writer teachers economics and finance at Montclair State University.

To the Editor:

I disagree with Steven Rattner’s argument that the corn ethanol program is responsible for rising food prices. Food prices are being driven by oil prices. This can be seen by noting that the price of corn shot up to $7 per bushel in 2008 simultaneous with the run-up in the price of oil to $140 a barrel; it then crashed to $3 per bushel in 2009, when oil dropped to $40 a barrel; and it has since come back up, tracking the price of oil. The prices of wheat and other grains have followed the same pattern, as has the price of fish.

Despite the ethanol program, American corn exports have not missed a beat. More important, because of the ethanol market, investments have occurred in new techniques that have increased average American corn yields from 120 bushels per acre in 2002 to 160 bushels per acre today, with some farms approaching 300 bushels per acre. These advances will help feed the world for decades to come.

There may be famine in many places globally this year. But this is because of the regressive tax on the world economy imposed by high oil prices. This needs to be eroded by competition from alternative fuels. Ethanol helps achieve that goal.

ROBERT ZUBRIN
Golden, Colo., June 26, 2011

The writer is the author of “Energy Victory: Winning the War on Terror by Breaking Free of Oil.”