I have seen some science-based dialog on the carbon inputs required to grow 
corn and turn it into ethanol, including the diesel fuel used by tractors, 
the energy needed to distill it, the natural gas used for fertilizer, etc.   
Some scientists believe strongly that the benefit of ethanol as an energy 
source is negligible because of the totality of energy inputs nearing or 
perhaps exceeding the energy value of the ethanol itself.

But what if more ecological factors were evaluated, such as topsoil loss, 
depletion of aquifers, pesticide and other chemical run-off, large-scale 
monoculture impacts on biodiversity, even the ultimate use of corn as feed 
for livestock to produce meat, which Jeremy Rifkin and others believe we 
would do better without or greatly reducing it in our diet.

When the President emphasizes a program to massively increase ethanol 
production, one has to wonder who the beneficiaries really are!

Stan Moore

_________________________________________________________________
FREE online classifieds from Windows Live Expo – buy and sell with people 
you know 
http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwex0010000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://expo.live.com?s_cid=Hotmail_tagline_12/06

Reply via email to