Letters to the editor

Comments | Recommended

Susan R. Berge: Ethanol is a classic government blunder

01:00 AM EDT on Wednesday, May 21, 2008

Unlike Washington lawmakers, some folks in this country are economically literate.

Last June 25, Human Events published “Ethanol Hurts Consumers in Many Ways” by Timothy P. Carney. I saved it because I knew the day would come when the idiocy of subsidizing ethanol production would hurt the American people.

Mr. Carney noted that federal subsidies for ethanol are driving up prices for food, fuel and land. Congress keeps out foreign competitors with a 54-cent tariff on imported ethanol. Finally, ethanol production is very energy-intensive, and it must be transported by truck rather than by pipeline. The result is that it takes more energy to produce and transport ethanol than adding ethanol to gasoline saves.

The second way ethanol drives up the cost of gasoline is that ethanol is one-third less efficient than gasoline. You can go further on a tank of gas than on a tank of gas and ethanol. The consequence is that we have to fill up our tanks more often.

Ethanol subsidies as a response to high energy costs are a classic example of the kind of stupid idea that only government could embrace.

I have no great love for the oil companies, but most of the blame for rapidly rising food and energy costs can be laid squarely at the feet of Congress.

SUSAN R. BERGE

Burrillville

Advertisement

Reader Reaction