[Paul Ross]

The problem is simple: It takes a whole lot of agricultural produce to create a modest amount of automotive fuel.

Lester Brown is not either very knowledgeable or expert, but he plays one on tv.

The switchover to bio-mass alternatives, basically highly efficient use of renewable agri-waste and low-impact plants, such as switch-grass etc is looming. Corn is projected to go over $5 a bushel even without the pressure of the ethanol industry, and this will, by the force of the free market, make it much more conducive to the adoption of the new feedstock sources for fermentation. Corn will be phased out...naturally...as a market response. Farmers will be happy, as they will have even more variety of sources of income, and stable income, they can develop. American auto owners will be happy, because their fuel prices will stabilize and their gas tanks won't be able to be shut off at the whim of Adhmanajad and Osama Bin Laden and his kin.

But, pity the poor liberal television gloom-and-doomers. They will be very unhappy.

[RedMonqey]

Fuel from ethanol is a lousy idea.

I wish it was otherwise because we are farmers and we would make some greenbacks from it but for a world that needs food more than fuel, it has major problem.

Why? Because the land, more specifically the soil can and will be worn out by overuse. The same cornstalks and uneatable "weeds" you say it will use are very important to provide the nutrients for the next crop.
Take that away each harvest and soon you will have a desert.
You say add fertilizer? Then you're back to petroleum because oil is a major ingredient in today's fertilizers.

Coal and oil sands are the way to go. They have no more important use than to make petroleum based products.