Swickard: Burnt up about the ethanol requirements

Commentary by Michael Swickard, Ph.D. - Ethanol requirements in gasoline are almost a complete disaster. Not quite, but close. Let us count the ways ethanol is good: there is only one. If no conventional fuel is available during a crisis, such as a war in the Middle East, we are glad to have ethanol. Is there anything else good about ethanol? No, the harm is profound.

To be sure gasoline is better, cheaper, less polluting, non-corrosive and ultimately less risky. Ethanol is so very corrosive that it cannot be transported by pipeline; rather, it must be shipped in stainless steel tanks either on the railroad or by truck. And therein is the problem for the consumer. Ethanol is so corrosive that people with older vehicles will see the destruction of gaskets, steel tanks and rubber fittings.
The harm of ethanol is not just to our pocketbooks and our vehicles, the use of food to make fuel when our nation has abundant energy resources causes food prices to increase. This is not just corn products. Wheat and rice products increase as consumers react to corn prices so that all three food prices increase. And, since beef, chicken and pork use these same grains, the price of meat increases dramatically.
In our country this is hard for people who live on subsistence calories. But the real damage of ethanol is that it injures fragile populations throughout the world. This has been seen with the price of corn tortillas in Mexico and food in the Middle East. Each place where food increases in price causes fragile citizens to be devastated by the pressure put on their basic subsistence.
The rise of food prices destabilizes some parts of the world, again, for no real good reason. Yes, there are those people who wave the “Global Warming” banner but day by day it is increasingly obvious to everyone that Global Warming is a political hoax.
In my town there was one vendor who sold gasoline without ethanol but alas, he was forced to only sell ethanol “enhanced” gasoline this last week. He sent me this message by email: “…I have spent my entire thirty two year career in the convenience store business being a leader and not follower. Words cannot explain my frustration and anger concerning being forced back into selling an ethanol blend fuel… I have a great collection of vintage vehicles and know the destruction that is being done by ethanol on my rubber gaskets and engine.”
The problem is Washington D. C. requiring a political solution to a non-political problem. People need energy but using the political solution of ethanol is tragic. This next year let us wrestle the government on the ethanol requirement. It may take all of us to do it. Read full column

Swickard: Burnt up about the ethanol requirements