EPA rejects Texas request to cut U.S. ethanol use

[Dover]

The U.S. Agriculture Department has said it expects U.S. food prices to climb 5 percent this year, the largest annual increase since 1990, then rise by another 4.5 percent in 2009.

====================================================================================================

WASHINGTON, Aug 7 (Reuters) - U.S. regulators on Thursday rejected a request to cut the amount of ethanol required in gasoline, saying there was no evidence that use of the corn-based fuel hurt the economy by driving up food costs.

The Renewable Fuel Standard still will require 9 billion gallons in renewable fuels to be blended into the nation's gasoline supply this year, and 11.1 billion gallons in 2009.
In April, Texas Governor Rick Perry asked the Environmental Protection Agency to cut the mandate by 50 percent. He argued that ethanol production was driving up the price of corn, making it more expensive for farmers to feed livestock.

The EPA said there was no evidence to support the claim by Texas that the mandate would "severely harm" the U.S. economy.
"This research found that the RFS mandate is not causing severe economic harm," EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson said. Johnson said the mandate was "strengthening our nation's energy security and supporting Americans' farming communities."...cont'd

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/feedarticle/7709069

[RC]

1. The people pushing ethanol seem to forget the high oil input required

to make a given unit of ethanol. The fertilizer, planting, cultivation, harvesting, transportation, and the actual making of the ethanol itself, all require large amounts of energy from oil.

Also if they were serous about ethanol, why not work on using sources higher in sugars than corn, such as Sugar Cane and Sugar Beets, instead of pushing Switch Grass, which has to be processed before it can be used for ethanol? Where I live they grow hundreds of millions of dollars of Sugar Beets every year and absolutely none of it goes to ethanol, not even the several hundreds of tons left to rot in the fields because they cannot process the excess.

Ethanol has its own set of problems and as things stand now, using energy intensive corn for ethanol does not really save much, if any oil. Also using corn for ethanol pushes up the price of corn and anything else that utilizes corn. Growing the extra corn required instead of other needed food crops, increases the price of those other food crops - Wheat, barley, oats, various beans. You name it.

The higher grocery prices is only partly caused by the higher price of oil. The rest is caused by the growing of a single food crop for fuel at the expense of the other food crops.

Ethanol for corn is another bu$h backed idea. So where is the "Hey, Wait a Minute Here!" moment when we realize we are being had again by the criminals in the White House?

[RC]

2. No mention of John Edwards...

No wonder this is sinking like a rock.