America gulps down over 20 million barrels of oil per day, more than twice what we produce and approximately one quarter of global production. In terms of gasoline consumption, America burns approximately 40 percent of the world’s supplies.

America’s seemingly unquenchable oil thirst has created two big problems: foreign oil dependency and environmental pollution. Many people, including politicians of both parties, consider corn ethanol the home-grown cure for both dilemmas. But just how well does corn ethanol stack up against oil on these two points?

Energy independence and pollution reduction were two issues President George W. Bush highlighted in his January 2007 State of the Union speech. “For too long our nation has been dependent on foreign oil,” he said. “And this dependence leaves us more vulnerable to hostile regimes, and to terrorists—who could cause huge disruptions of oil shipments, and raise the price of oil, and do great harm to our economy. It’s in our vital interest to diversify America’s energy supply ….

“We need to press on with … hybrid vehicles, and … continue investing in new methods of producing ethanol …. And these technologies will help us be better stewards of the environment,” he said.

In this and other forums, President Bush’s administration has highlighted the dangers of foreign oil addiction while encouraging and promoting alternative energy, such as ethanol, as a substitute. America has responded valiantly. Over the past three years, farmers harvested record crops, sending billions of bushels of maize to the 113 ethanol refineries that have sprouted up across the country—resulting in billions of gallons of fuel. Ten million additional acres devoted to corn may be planted this year to meet demand. Detroit’s giant automobile manufacturers also stepped up to the plate, churning out cars, trucks and suvs that can run on the alternative fuel. Politicians have done their part too, approving subsidies for ethanol fermenting and distilling companies, while slapping taxes on imported foreign sources.

“It’s coming on dramatically; more rapidly than anyone had expected,” said Nathanael Greene, a senior policy analyst at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

In fact, ethanol production is growing even faster than farmers can plant and grow additional corn. Ethanol production has doubled over the past three years to almost 5 billion gallons last year, according to the trade group Renewable Fuels Association (Associated Press, March 12). Last year’s production alone would fill one sixth of America’s strategic petroleum reserve. With 78 more corn ethanol plants under construction, the country’s ethanol output will likely double again over the next two years.

Corn ethanol may seem like the perfect solution to America’s energy needs. What could be more ideal than turning America’s thousands of acres of cropland into a giant energy source? Ethanol is cleaner burning, plus it reduces dependence on foreign oil we are told. But, before you run out and purchase that new environmentally friendly hybrid car or slap on your “Corn Fed” bumper sticker, you might want to consider some facts. Believe it or not, corn ethanol as it is currently produced is neither solving America’s oil addiction, nor making the environment cleaner.

Perhaps the biggest problem with corn ethanol is that, as it is currently produced, America doesn’t have the farmland to supply enough ethanol to break its oil addiction. Corn ethanol production requires massive amounts of land. If America’s entire 2006 corn harvest of 70 million acres was used for ethanol, it would only displace just 12 percent of U.S. gasoline consumption (Washington Post, March 25).

Then there is the matter of cost. Our Western oil-based society, fueled by cheap oil, is used to investing relatively small amounts of energy to get big energy returns. By comparison, corn ethanol isn’t cheap. The main reason is that the production process for corn ethanol is very energy intensive. It takes energy to make the fertilizer, fuel to run the tractors and swathers, fuel to transport the corn to the ethanol plants. Energy is also required to transform the corn into ethanol, not to mention all the energy that goes into producing the farmers’ equipment. Then, since ethanol cannot be transported in traditional oil pipelines because it corrodes the seals, all ethanol production must be shipped from the factories to destination by trains, barges or trucks, all of which run on diesel or gasoline; alternatively, a whole new pipeline grid transporting ethanol from factories to market would need to be constructed.

In fact, there is debate over whether the energy input required to make a gallon of corn ethanol actually exceeds its energy output. Even the most optimistic experts report that it takes the energy equivalent of 3 gallons of ethanol to produce about 4 gallons of the fuel. With oil, it only costs the energy equivalent of less than 1 gallon to produce 10 gallons of energy in return. Put simply, if America decides it wants to switch to an ethanol-based society, it has to be prepared to pay more for it.

As it is today, corn ethanol is so expensive that the government directly subsidizes each and every gallon of domestically produced ethanol by 51 cents. All told, federal and state governments spent about $6 billion subsidizing ethanol in 2006. Corn ethanol is not even competitive against other ethanol forms, such as that produced from sugarcane. So to protect domestic corn ethanol producers, legislators have slapped tariffs on less-expensive imported ethanol (Wall Street Journal, January 27).

Although ramping-up ethanol production may slightly help reduce America’s foreign oil addiction, it is clearly not the complete solution to the problem. That said, future advances in technology may significantly increase ethanol yields per bushel and therefore also reduce the economic costs of ethanol. If that were to occur, then promoting more widespread ethanol replacement of gasoline might be more compelling.

However, even if the benefits of corn ethanol with regard to energy independence are marginal, at least America would reap benefits from a more environmentally friendly fuel, right? The answer may not be what you think. Log on to theTrumpet.com for a future analysis of the environmental impact of corn ethanol usage.