Ethanol: Chemistry Lesson on Carbon Dioxide Rates - Ethanol Contributes More to Global Warming on an Energy Output-Adjusted Basis than Gasoline

I have seen this data elsewhere, but nowhere as clearly as in the following letter in the Wall Street Journal, Ethanol: Chemistry Lesson on Carbon Dioxide Rates - WSJ.com Basically, a cornerstone of my personal foreign policy is energy independence, and for that reasons ethanol from corn is a good thing worthy of consideration. However, on closer examination, we would be fooling ourselves to think that ethanol from corn (includngthe neergy inputs to grow it) is the right choice from a greenhouse gases perspective -- in fact, ethanol, for the amount of energy it emits, creates more than half as much MORE greenhouse gases than gasoline. As Washington hands out big subsidies to politically powerful corn producers and other special interests, it is important to keep these facts in mind, if we are really to make progress on BOTH the energy independence AND global warming issues.

We are rarely presented with a "two for the price of one" opportunity in solving the world's problems -- lets not screw this one up. Any solution to both these problems is not going to invove one big fix, but a variety of fixes. Also, whether we like it or not, nuclear has the greatest potential to be a big part of this solution, alongside coal (with regard to the latter, only IF we can figure out how to sequester carbon dioxide from coal burning at power plants). A good beginning would be to focus research dollars on development of more efficient batteries and mobile (i.e., automobile-level) fuel cells, superconductivity to transport nuclear generated electrivcity from remote locations, and safe nuclear electricity (and related hydrogen production to power those fuel cell-powered cars) as REALISTIC alternatives to solving our energy and green house gas problems. See my old blog posting from this summer "Our National Security Requires a Solution to Our Total Energy Dependence Upon Hydrocarbons" (scroll down to the bottom of that page to find it) which includes a link to a great article from Scientific American on a new national power grid idea. Also, for something very market driven but containing some real innovative thinking, see the recent Forbes opinion piece by Peter Huber, "Love Uranium" (yeh, I know, very off-putting title,, but the piece really makes you think).