Addicted to corn?

Articles — By forcechange on March 25, 2008 2:30 am

Environmental Capital, at WSJ.com, looked at a subject we have discussed regularly here—which is: are biofuels a part of the solution, or an unintended exacerbation of the problem of global warming?

As we’ve noted previously, some recent studies indicate that biofuels, such as ethanol, may actually be worse for the environment than the fossil fuels they replace. In our discussions, we’ve usually limited our analysis to which option releases more aggregate CO2 into the atmosphere. However, the Environmental Capital post notes that some experts believe that biofuel production has resulted in a 15% decrease in oil prices. Therefore, if recent policies by developed nations to increase biofuel usage are reversed, would that result in a subsequent 15% increase in oil prices?

We find this question interesting because it presents two options that are not normally pitted against each other in such a manner. If biofuel is worse for the environment than petroleum, but its production results in more affordable oil, will we find ourselves “addicted to corn?”

Photo credit.