haha, yeah - forgot a word there.
Energy, not biofuels impact, true consumer ‘crisis’
That’s according to national Renewable Fuels Association (RFA) spokesman Matt Hartwig, who argues suspension of the nation’s newly expanded renewable fuels standard would be the “absolute wrong thing for this administration to do,”
use of food crops for biofuels once again came under some fire during last week’s world food summit in London, which focused on rising food prices.
Hartwig said he believes the “food vs. fuel” controversy has been generated largely by livestock interests and groups such as the Grocery Manufacturers Association that are affected by commodity prices.
Interrupting domestic ethanol investment by suspending federal mandates “would not achieve the kids of results with respect to commodity prices those in the livestock and ‘big food’ industries are seeking,” Hartwig said.
But it would “set back this nation’s quest to become more energy self-sufficient by several years,” he warned.
A new Texas A&M University report argues the cost of items such as bread, eggs, and milk are related more to supply and demand than ethanol or corn prices. Hartwig cited other factors as well, including $117-per-barrel oil, drought conditions in key world production areas, “restrictive policies” that limit adoption of higher-yielding GMO crops, and a weak dollar.
Further, he argued speculation is “running rampant, particularly through the grain markets.”
Current oil and gasoline prices would be 15 percent higher “were it not for world biofuels,” he estimated. Ethanol is a crucial and relative inexpensive source of fuel oxygen for high-pollution markets, as well as a fuel “supply extender,” he said.
Third World food concerns focus largely on rice and wheat – both non-biofuels crops, he pointed out. As corn plantings reached near-record levels last season, Hartwig noted wheat acres were at their highest levels in four years, and stressed “we don’t plant corn in rice paddies.”
Energy, not biofuels impact, true consumer ‘crisis’
That’s according to national Renewable Fuels Association (RFA) spokesman Matt Hartwig, who argues suspension of the nation’s newly expanded renewable fuels standard would be the “absolute wrong thing for this administration to do,”
use of food crops for biofuels once again came under some fire during last week’s world food summit in London, which focused on rising food prices.
Hartwig said he believes the “food vs. fuel” controversy has been generated largely by livestock interests and groups such as the Grocery Manufacturers Association that are affected by commodity prices.
Interrupting domestic ethanol investment by suspending federal mandates “would not achieve the kids of results with respect to commodity prices those in the livestock and ‘big food’ industries are seeking,” Hartwig said.
But it would “set back this nation’s quest to become more energy self-sufficient by several years,” he warned.
A new Texas A&M University report argues the cost of items such as bread, eggs, and milk are related more to supply and demand than ethanol or corn prices. Hartwig cited other factors as well, including $117-per-barrel oil, drought conditions in key world production areas, “restrictive policies” that limit adoption of higher-yielding GMO crops, and a weak dollar.
Further, he argued speculation is “running rampant, particularly through the grain markets.”
Current oil and gasoline prices would be 15 percent higher “were it not for world biofuels,” he estimated. Ethanol is a crucial and relative inexpensive source of fuel oxygen for high-pollution markets, as well as a fuel “supply extender,” he said.
Third World food concerns focus largely on rice and wheat – both non-biofuels crops, he pointed out. As corn plantings reached near-record levels last season, Hartwig noted wheat acres were at their highest levels in four years, and stressed “we don’t plant corn in rice paddies.”
Comment