http://www.slate.com/id/2169124/ i agree with that article. ethanol is a disaster. if it is profitable and worthwhile, the free market will take care of it. what we have here is a couple of factors. environmental idiots who have convinced themselves they need to do something about the non-issue of global warming, and the corn states getting in on a free ride. you ask me how evironmental alarmism hurts america, here is your answer.
dont you think people buying corn will automatically determine how much they need? if we want to buy corn, somebody will grow it. no quota necessary. why not kill corn subsidies, that might help sugar farmers. and if they cant survive, how about we just buy our sugar from wherever we please? we need to stop think that "we" need to do this or what. "we" dont need to do anything. "we" need to allow the market to do whatever. if we want sugar or corn, we go to the store and buy it from whoever wants to profit from selling it to us. this requires no planning on the part of the government.
What? No free exchange of corn? We should be able to just steal corn whenever we want to. Farmers grow corn because they love it, not for the money. They like it when we steal their corn. It's free publicity!
I am all for ethanol if it was produce solely by sugar cane. I work for the LSU AgCenter and I had to bring an Iranian scientist who came to LSU to promote sugar cane ethanol and he said if one of the big oil companies jumped on it, the rest would follow. Imagine how good that would be for this state. So if it sugar cane ethanol, I'm all for it. If it's corn, than I couldn't care less for it because it will be more expensive and less efficient than the petroleum based gas we're using now
There is not enough sugar cane to make the quantity of ethanol needed. We'd have many of the same issues as we have with corn ethanol. That packet of sugar we put in coffee would cost more than the coffee itself.
