« Fighting for Free Music | Main | Go Ask Congress When It's Ten Feet Tall »

May 18, 2008


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


"A geoengineer at UC Berkley has produced a study that determines that it requires six times more energy to produce ethanol than the finished product contains, thus far more carbon dioxide is emitted in making it than is saved by using it."

The fact doesn't prove the statement. You must also give the amount of energy required to produce gasoline, and "carbon dioxide is emitted" is a lazy translation of more fossil fuels being necessary to produce it, because you didn't say that the fossil fuels represent that 6x more energy exclusively.

Just clean up the facts to make a more solid case.

Alex Levy

It's disingenuous to claim that those who argue for action on climate change are the same who created the ethanol debacle. Ethanol was a piggyback spin campaign by corporate farmers and their lobbyists to help politicians put a coat of green paint on ordinary pork-barrel spending policies. Serious environmentalists have been warning for years that corn ethanol does not reduce carbon emissions and puts serious strain on food supplies. (Cellulosic ethanol still holds a lot of promise.)

US ethanol producers may claim to share environmentalists' concerns, but it does not mean the two groups are in league with one another. Nor does it mean one is to blame for the failures of the other. Mr. Hawley would do well to learn that.

Michael N

"Serious environmentalists" is a vague term. There is a section of green advocates who did not push for ethanol, but there is a larger section that did.

The comments to this entry are closed.