Allentown Morning Call, PA
08-15-07
Ethanol will cost us at the pump and the table
By Manfred Kroger
Ethanol is not much of an issue in this presidential election, but it ought to be.
The government's use of subsidies and mandates to ensure a dramatic rise in
ethanol production has become increasingly heavy-handed -- thoughtless, and
heedless, of consequences. Worse, this is bipartisan, which may be why it is not
a campaign issue.
What is so disturbing is that virtually all of the ethanol used in the United States is
made from corn. The strain on the food supply is rippling across the marketplace,
with consumers paying more for everything from meat and dairy products to soft
drinks. According to Iowa State University, the increase in ethanol production
during the past year has raised food prices by $47 per person. This is not
insignificant, especially for the elderly on fixed incomes.
Nevertheless, the Bush administration is pressing for a seven-fold increase in
alternative fuels production, to 36 billion gallons a year by 2022, up from 5 billion
0gallons this year. Virtually all of the initial 15 billion gallons is expected to come
from corn-based ethanol. The rest would have to be ethanol derived from
cellulosic sources such as switch grass. Legislation that would benefit ethanol
producers with tax credits, subsidies, loan guarantees, and import restrictions is
moving through Congress, with support from the Democratic leadership.
The question is, why? If the goal is to reduce dependence on Middle East oil,
there are easier ways to accomplish it, with considerable savings for both
consumers and taxpayers. Improving energy efficiency is the fastest, cheapest,
cleanest way to reduce foreign-oil dependence and greenhouse-gas emissions.
For instance, inflating tires so that automobiles operate efficiently would result in
a sizable savings of gasoline.
Ethanol is not the magic elixir that its boosters claim it to be. It's expensive and
wasteful. Because it contains one-third less energy than gasoline, corn ethanol
costs several times more to produce. Without subsidies, costs would be higher
still. A study last year by the International Institute for Sustainable Development
found that ethanol subsidies amount to 42 percent to 55 percent of ethanol's
wholesale market price.
We are using 20 percent of the corn produced in the United States to produce
ethanol, but this has barely made a dent in U.S. gasoline consumption,
amounting to less than 5 percent of gasoline sold. If ethanol production were
three times greater, it would replace only about 10 percent of the gasoline.
Consider how ethanol is made. Growing and harvesting the corn and heating the
fermented corn until it is virtually pure ethanol require an enormous amount of
energy. Fossil fuels provide this energy. Studies show that it takes almost as
much energy to make ethanol as the ethanol provides.
The growing use of ethanol also has unanticipated environmental consequences.
Increased corn production drains groundwater supplies, requires more use of
nitrogen fertilizer and pesticides, increases soil erosion and chemical runoff, and
leads to changes in the carbon content of soils and carbon stocks in forests that
threaten to undue the benefits of reductions in greenhouse-gas emissions.
Certainly, a plan to increase ethanol production sevenfold, as the one before
Congress does, would trigger substantial public debate, especially if it were
realized that reductions in greenhouse emissions and foreign-oil dependence
could be achieved without boosting food prices. This plan has political support,
especially in the Midwest states, but the consequences are not widely
acknowledged. Instead, we have had an obscure debate about the desirability of
a government mandate for ethanol production.
When the corn crop is discussed at all, it is in the context of choices among
competing biofuels, not in terms of the impact corn ethanol is having on food
prices today and those to be expected if Congress approves the administration
plan. Thus, the food-for-fuel problem is defined away while nothing is done to
solve it. Successful societies do not make decisions this way.
We need to be sensible about corn ethanol. We are fast approaching its upper
limits. It's not too late for the administration and Congress to drop the mandate
and reduce the subsidies for ethanol. Otherwise, everyone will be paying a lot
more at the pump and to put food on the table.
Manfred Kroger, Ph.D., is professor of food science emeritus at The
Pennsylvania State University in University Park.