Good Idea, Bad Idea, Worse Idea

Good Idea: Stopping global warming by weening us off of fossil fuels and using green energy

Bad Idea: Ignoring the threat of global warming and doing nothing

Worse Idea: Ethanol

That is, by itself, ethanol is a worse idea.

Bush talked about ethanol in the State of the Union Address as he has before, but while talking about ethanol may drive up prices for corn, it does not really address the issues for which we need an alternative fuel sources.

Energy experts knock Bush plan for ethanol as gas substitute
They say it would be costly and inefficient and might force choice: corn for food or fuel

[...]

The vast majority of ethanol comes from corn. But diesel fuel powers the tractors that tend corn fields, natural gas runs the distilleries that produce ethanol, and more diesel is used to ship the finished product to market. The power you get out of corn ethanol, in other words, might just barely beat the power you put into it.

Scientists have argued for years about how much of a net power gain corn ethanol provides, some insisting that it consumes more than it produces. The federal government, for its part, estimates that ethanol gives about 1.6 units of energy for every unit that goes in. But even some researchers who agree say that the fuel doesn't provide much benefit in the end and that the nation shouldn't rely too heavily upon it to the detriment of other biofuels.

[...]

The relatively minor amount of ethanol now made -- about 5 billion gallons per year -- already consumes about 12 to 15 percent of the nation's corn crop. At some point, producing more would force the country to balance its need for fuel with its need for food.

Food is sort of the reason that most of us use fuel. We use fuel to drive to work to make money to buy food to eat to live. Trading food for fuel defeats the purpose.

There is an argument to be made for for biodiesel, but that has problems too.

The president specifically mentioned biodiesel as one alternative that could help wean America off oil. The fuel, which has been around literally as long as diesel engines, is twice as energy efficient as corn ethanol and can be made from a wide variety of natural, renewable sources, such as new and used vegetable oils and animal fats. But its use in the United States remains small, despite recent growth.

Federal estimates project that within 10 to 15 years, the country could churn out 10 billion gallons of biodiesel annually, compared to roughly 75 million gallons in 2005. But the nation now uses 60 billion gallons of petroleum diesel each year and will need far more in the future. Biodiesel, in other words, probably can't make the kind of big dent in oil consumption that Bush wants.

Also, burning ethanol and biodiesel still produces carbon dioxide which is a greenhouse gas which adds to global warming. At least, ethanol and biodiesel are considered to be "renewable" energy which is much better than fossil fuels, but it is not clear to me whether their usage would still slightly increase CO2 levels, slightly reduce CO2 levels, or keep CO2 levels the more or less the same.

Whatever the case, dramatically reducing CO2 levels should be our main goal in our energy policy. We should be researching and developing solar, wind, tidal, and magnetic energy which do not emit CO2 and additionally and importantly do not emit pollution.