Christian Science Monitor
07-29-07
A Dark Side To The Ethanol Boom?
Backlash To Fuel Made From Corn Emerges Among Environmentalists,
Economists And Antipoverty Activists
by Brad Knickerbocker.
In some circles, ethanol made from corn has become a golden nectar in the fight
against global warming. It comes from a benign, wholesome, home-grown plant,
and it produces no nasty greenhouse gases that cause climate change.
But a backlash to corn ethanol is emerging. Environmentalists, economists, and
poverty activists all are raising questions.
Making ethanol from corn may be "much less efficient" than producing gasoline
from oil, reportsThe Associated Press:
"Just growing corn requires expending energy — plowing, planting, fertilizing,
and harvesting all require machinery that burns fossil fuel. Modern agriculture
relies on large amounts of fertilizer and pesticides, both of which are produced by
methods that consume fossil fuels. Then there's the cost of transporting the corn
to an ethanol plant, where the fermentation and distillation processes consume
yet more energy. Finally, there's the cost of transporting the fuel to filling stations.
And because ethanol is more corrosive than gasoline, it can't be pumped through
relatively efficient pipelines, but must be transported by rail or tanker truck."
Other environmental problems exist as well, according to a report cited in a
recent article in the online magazine NewScientist.com. Among the report's
conclusions:
# Intensive harvesting erodes soil;
# Massive use of fertilizers contributes to the eutrophication of rivers and lakes
and the reduction of fish and aquatic life habitat;
# Widespread use of pesticides contaminates water and soil
# Extensive irrigation for corn monoculture depletes water resources.
Another downside to corn ethanol, according to a BBC report, is that land which
until recently was growing crops for food is now growing crops for fuel:
"The United Nations says a third of the total U.S. maize [corn] crop went for
ethanol last year. The International Monetary Fund says there's no question that
demand for biofuels is driving up food prices — and that it will go on doing so…."
UN officials are cautious about such predictions, but they do acknowledge the
problem, reports Reuters. According to U.N. Environment Program executive
director Achim Steiner:
"… there is significant potential and risk for competition between food production
and production for a global biofuels market … We have to be aware that there
are risks and for some countries those risks may not be worth taking."
In the United States, the push for corn ethanol already has boosted food prices
— everything from a dinner entree to the popcorn families munch at the latest
"Harry Potter" movie. "Higher corn prices have boosted the cost of producing
beef, poultry and thousands of processed products," writes columnist John Wasik
of Bloomberg.com:
"Food prices have climbed an average of $47 per person due to the ethanol
surge since last July, according to an Iowa State University study published in
May; corn-price futures reached a 10-year high of $4.28 a bushel in February. All
told, ethanol has cost Americans an additional $14 billion in higher food prices."
Meanwhile, "rising food prices are threatening the ability of aid organizations to
help the world's hungriest people according to a story in The Christian Science
Monitor," this week. One main reason? "Growing demand for grains as biofuels is
pushing up the price of grains for human and livestock food," the Monitor reports.
"Is a biofuel backlash coming?" asks business columnist Eric Reguly in the online
edition of The Globe and Mail in Toronto.
"In Rome, the World Food Program, the U.N. agency charged with fighting
famine, said its budgets are being strained because of surging food prices …
"The world has 800 million cars. If filling them with ethanol and other plantderived fuels keeps pushing prices up, the world's 2 billion poor people will have
something to say about it."
But as many economists have pointed out, part of the problem is that in some
countries — the U.S. among them — biofuels are heavily subsidized by the
federal government. Mr. Reguly continues:
"Left on its own, the market in time would find a balance between food and fuel
production. As it is, the billions in subsidies are encouraging a dramatic rise in
biofuel production that would not otherwise occur. "This is partly why the U.N.
food agencies are worried. Too much biofuel is coming to the market too quickly,
and the casualties might be the poor who can't afford the sharply rising food
prices."
© 2007 The Christian Science Monitor. All rights reserved.