3 of 14

Write now Article Tools

Page 2 of 2

fuels from counties that are largely unstable or unfriendly. Ethanol, however, does not provide an answer.

The United States, the world's largest producer of corn, simply cannot grow enough corn to replace fossil fuels with ethanol. Consider this. Currently more than one fifth of all U.S. corn production is converted to ethanol, yet E85 is only available at about one half of one percent of the nation's gas stations. Current estimates are that converting the entire U.S. corn crop to ethanol would only reduce fossil fuel consumption by 2.4 percent. The General Accounting Office saw the futility of ethanol in 1997 stating, "ethanol's potential for substituting for petroleum is so small that it is unlikely to significantly effect overall energy security."

The economics of ethanol do not work for the American consumer either. Ethanol is not less expensive than gasoline. In fact, it took more than $6 billion in subsidies in 2007 to make E85 cost competitive with gasoline on a per gallon basis. Even then, this is not a break-even proposition for drivers. Cars average 20 to 30 percent fewer miles per gallon using E85 than gasoline because ethanol has a lower energy content than gasoline. So, consumers buy more ethanol than gas. In essence if gasoline was $3 per gallon, E85 would have to be priced at or below $2.25 per gallon for consumers to break even.

The real cost of ethanol to Americans cannot be calculated in dollars or tons of carbon emissions, instead it is the loss of something far more valuable, the chance to develop real alternatives energy sources. Every dime that is spent on ethanol subsidies and production is money not spent researching fuels that hold legitimate potential as long-term energy solutions.

Learn more about this author, M B Parker.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

• << previous page
• 1
• 2

Add your voice

Know something about The truth about ethanol?
We want to hear your view. Write now!