- Obama takes aim at ‘corporate deserters’
- Dick’s Sporting Goods lays off 478 PGA golf pros
- Senators: Cease-fire must allow Israel to defend against rockets, tunnels
- Sierra Leone doctor fighting Ebola catches disease
- Iraq welcomes Russian fighter jets, helicopter gunships into ISIL fight
- John McCain laments: Obama’s ‘self-pity … is really kind of sad’
- GOP offer to fix VA gives $10 billion in emergency funds
- Paul Ryan offers to repair U.S. economic safety net with a single grant stream
- Kim Jong-un builds bond with Putin: $250M Russia-backed addition to key port opens
- Pope Francis meets Meriam Ibrahim, a Sudanese woman sentenced to death
LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Ethanol’s impact on food prices is minimal
Question of the Day
The editorial, “Biofuel mandates worsen drought’s effect” (Comment & Analysis, Tuesday) makes some dubious assumptions and comes to inaccurate conclusions regarding ethanol production and the food supply. While there is no denying the drought has had a substantial impact on this year’s corn crop, U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Thomas J. Vilsack has gone on the record to say that year’s yield, while down from record predictions, will still meet our food needs, and that obligated parties have the ability to meet the volume requirements of the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS).
What ethanol critics need in this case is a strong dose of reality. Of the total U.S. crop planted, less than 1 percent is sweet corn. However, more than 99 percent is No. 2 yellow corn, or field corn, the primary use of which is livestock and poultry feed. Just 1.5 percent of that yield is used in actual food production — a minuscule fraction of our yearly corn crop.
The simple reality is the RFS was designed with situations such as this in mind, allowing for flexibility. Already the market has responded — ethanol production has slowed, and we currently have a surplus of nearly 1 billion gallons. Additionally, there are more than 3 billion Renewable Identification Numbers available to ensure obligated parties can meet the volume requirements.
To suggest any meaningful impact on food prices from ethanol production is just hysteria during a time of economic turmoil. Earlier this month, General Mills Chief Executive Ken Powell estimated that food prices would increase by 2 percent to 3 percent, compared to an increase of more than 10 percent last year, noting “consumers should see generally stable prices.”
I find it curious that this editorial said ethanol producers and farmers are engaged in market manipulation when they are simply participating in the free market now, after years of government subsidies keeping corn prices low. We have never, ever run out of corn. Have we run out of cheap corn? Yes. But to attack the free market when it works is downright disingenuous.
President and chief operating officer
© Copyright 2014 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
TWT Video Picks
By Michael Widlanski
Leveling the battlefield to aid terrorists enables evil to fight on
Get Breaking Alerts
- 'We're coming for you, Barack Obama': Top U.S. official discloses threat from ISIL terrorists
- NAPOLITANO: What if our democracy is a fraud?
- Hamas rejects Kerry's call for cease-fire; Fears grow others could join fight against Israel
- Evidence shows Russia firing artillery into Ukraine: Pentagon
- Obama orders Pentagon advisers to Ukraine
- Algerian plane diverted due to storms, second aircraft: 116 missing
- Cutler wins endorsement from gun control group
- 'Straight White Guy Festival' supposedly set for Ohio park
- HUSAIN: Fleeing Iraqi Christians find safe haven at the Shrine of Imam Ali
- CARSON: Costco and the perils of mixing politics and business