Terry,
> We could produce more if needed; but, we already have surpluses and pay farmers not to plant crops. Is this still going on despite record prices for corn? If so, it weakens the "no food-grain for fuel" argument. That is: if we have land which is not being planted and is receiving subsidies instead. I would have thought that program would have been erased by market conditions. That [no food-grain for fuel argument] would probably stand on moral grounds, as well, and almost no rational person would say that we should not switch to "non-food" inputs, such as switchgrass or especially algae -- for the carbon needed to make the fuel. Which brings us back to the Dutch and what they are doing with their own efficient Ag. base to confront the biofuel situation. http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5gQ3sAwA4Lwa15Z-fIiZyWJejgRUg I suspect that they will probably bring this process to market before we can do it here.
