The crazies never cease to amaze me. They twist any step in the right direction around so they can keep their jobs as alarmists. In an honest world, total world ecological balance and an end to global warming and pollution would put a LOT of people out of a job. But in this world, they'll spin it into some other danger so they can keep the industry going.
True. IMO the article was a realistic review of the downside of ethanol/biofuels. However, at the end the author goes into the standand enviro-lib line:
Our primary need is to curb reliance on foreign oil. ... The most obvious way is to improve the efficiency of vehicles by 30 to 50 percent over the next few decades. Americans need more hybrids and more small vehicles. Biofuels might be a complement, but if they blind us to this larger reality, they will be a step backward.
Nothing about increasing our domestic exploration and production. Can't have that; its against their party line that says we can't be strong on our own and of course the only sources of energy acceptable to them are solar and wind. So we must build smaller cramped cars, etc. Nothing about nuclear power (HORRORS!!), or conversion of coal to synfuel as we have vast resources of coal and that technology does not have the downside of the ethanol/biofuels boondoggle. I'm completely in agreement with from occupied ga and thackney on these points.