the point being that most ethanol critics are unreasonably harsh

David Morris writes that even nuclear power has gotten more of a free ride than ethanol.

"Ethanol is not a perfect fuel. Corn is far from a perfect fuel crop. We should debate their imperfections. But we should also keep in mind the first law of ecology. "There is no such thing as a free lunch." Tapping into any energy source involves tradeoffs.

Yet when it comes to ethanol, and corn, we accept no tradeoffs. In 30 years in the business of alternative energy, I've never encountered the level of animosity generated by ethanol, not even in the debate about nuclear power. When it comes to ethanol, we seem to apply a different standard than we do when we evaluate other fuels."

http://alternet.org/environment/53956/

All right. Two words and a binary operator.

The exploitation of ethanol has been completely bungled, too. Instead of using cellulosic foodstocks, we are using food, and it has begun to hurt the poor.

"... I've never encountered the level of animosity generated by ethanol, not even in the debate about nuclear power." I beg to differ. I am one of the pro-nuclear leftists, and the amount of hostility I have encountered far exceeds any that I have gotten from criticizing Skeptics (CSICOP, The Amazing Randi, Penn & Teller, etc.), in spite of being much more polite in nuclear issues. Even in this forum, I am accused of being in the pay of the nuclear industry, at a time in my life when I am completely broke from 5 years of poor health.

If there was one thing I would change about the big conversation, it would be that everyone think more "holistically" about energy and environmental problems. We have our favorite issues and overlook some truly huge problems. We never saw the biofuel betrayal coming (well, I did, but even I was late) and most of us are only beginning to wake up to the radioactivity risk posed by coal combustion.

But my point here is not to stump for my favorites and bash your favorites. Whatever mix of energy sources we accept, it will require "systems thinking" and a lot of diligence, since energy production is one of those things that is done better by large enterprises. Even my "second" choice for baseload energy generation, deep geothermal, can not be done by backyard hobbyists -- not that common-use solar and wind power can, either, although that's the perception. If the energy is destined to be "big bidness," then the people damned well ought to be the ones who make the rules.

This era will initiate a new generation of environmentalist thinking -- and it will require a much more aggressive and expansive, if less "protesty", style of advocacy. We have seven, soon eight billion people to think about and a planetary climate crisis, compared to 3.6 billion people in steady weather on the first Earth Day in 1970. Our problems will only get bigger and more complex. Our thinking must be able to encompass it. We have already failed the first "test" with ethanol -- let it be our last.

--p!

We have. That is how we discovered that ethanol contains more bad news than good. As Pigwidgeon says above, most of us started out as biofuel believers. We only went over to the dark side once we looked beyond the hype to the facts and did the cost/benefit analysis. Our animosity comes from being sold a bill of goods and watching the biofuel industry begin to ruin the planet even in the face of our fact-based objections.

better for Brazil to keep its own money.
better for Malaysia to keep ts own money

Is it better to starve Mexicans so the corn can help fill your gas tank?

Give a break.

People will go on for hours and hours about what "could" have happened if there was a pin hole leak in a nuclear plant, but when an ethanol tanker explodes killing almost all of the crew, it's forgotten.

How many irrational organizations have formed to offer irrational arguments against ethanol?

In fact, ethanol wishful thinking dates back to the Carter administration, and almost all of the press has been popular about ethanol.

Ethanol is one of those deals that sounds just great until you actually go to do it. There is a warning in this, but I doubt that there is a single "renewables will save us" advocate who will get it before it's way too late.

Get over it.

Even if ethanol goes away corn belt still going to grow corn
ah but its not going away

Best land is still be converted to Mac mansions

Still put crops on open market

Still let people who don't own crops or make any food bet on Food futures!
So letting them change what poor people pay for food.

Why do we put limits on where food is grown or animals in town? Oh we want to move to the land but we don't want the smells. We want to eat but we don't want to put up with the smells.

Why do we mix human manure with chemical waste with our sewage system so said manure can't be put on the land which made the food? Only people would think that they cheat the system.

Why do we grow so much landscape grass? Does that feed anyone?

Why no concern over golf course do they feed anyone?

Or Sod farms do they feed anyone?

Or why do we grow only male landscape bushes and trees? (so we don't have to clean up seeds)(That feed the birds and other who live here with us.

Why don't we use road way ditches to grow crops instead of grass? Some is harvested most is wasted.

Bio fuels will be a big part of this. Making food and transport will good use of bio fuels. If people have to walk or well.

How big is your yard maybe we should have a say on what you grow also?

Are we going to change farm policy that just trying to make farms bigger and bigger? Small farm are the best, said farmer knows every inch and gets the most out of it while doing the least damage.

Are we going to change milk supports? Now they are paid a per mileage price from how far they are away from Wisconsin. So now we have dairy's being put up in Utah and Ca. Some is needed for local use but it really to get the better price. Should we have diary where water is short supply.

I know why don't you guys just take over the land grow stuff yourself. Nah then you would have to take the risks that farmers have every year! Much better to sell stuff to farmers and take the money that way!