ABOUT
Smart discussion of the latest science and news on toxins in your food, water, and air, and what government agencies should be doing to protect public health. Written by EWG staff.
DONATE TO EWG!
Help us protect your health and environment! Please donate $5 to EWG today.
GET EWG'S TIPS & ACTION ALERTS
Sign Up here to receive email updates and tips from EWG and stay informed on the issues that matter most to you.
ENVIROBLOG VIA EMAIL
Join EWG's live chat with Chef Ann Cooper
School lunch: More fruits & veggies, please!
Texas Schools are Drilling for Dollars
Why do blowouts take so long to fix?
SEARCH ENVIROBLOG
FEATURED
Support the 2010 Safe Cosmetics Act. It's Urgent.
Why, oh why is there plastic in my aluminum water bottle?
Cell phone radiation series - Part 2: 8 Ways to reduce your exposure
Test Your Knowledge of Cosmetics Safety: 8 Myths Debunked
EWG's Tips for Parents: The Series
EWG's Tips to avoid BPA exposure
EWG on TV
Cutting the Pork from U.S. Farm Bill
Sunscreen safety & DC drinking water
Perchlorate in people, kids' personal care products & plastics, and sunscreen
BPA in baby formula & safe cosmetics
What can I do about fluoride in my water?
What is new carpet treated with? What can I do?
Are stainless steel water bottles safe?
Is mineral-based makeup safer?
PEOPLE TALKING TOXICS
TALK TO US
Did we miss something? Email Enviroblog.
« Bush's 'biofuel boosterism' boondoggle? | Main | The upside of higher gas prices »
More reactions to Bush's ethanol plan
Today North Jersey's The Record highlights some salient observations illuminating the reality behind Bush's ethanol proposal.
Eric DeGesero, executive VP of the New Jersey Fuel Merchants Association, wants to remind us that putting more corn into fuel production could raise the cost of America’s corn-intensive diet (though something tells me Mr. DeGesero should visit a nutritionist).
"You'll pay more for Twinkies or Coca-Cola or Frosted Flakes, which are sweetened with corn syrup, because of the demand ethanol will put on the price for a bushel of corn."
Bush "20 in 10" plan calls for a 20 percent reduction in the amount of gasoline consumed in the country within 10 years.
But, the fine print called for reducing the "projected" amount of gasoline to be used in a decade, not the amount that's currently being used.
Which would explain why:
Environmental groups argued that Bush's proposal was too weak when it came to requiring automakers to increase fuel-efficiency standards, and the alternative fuels proposal might sound popular but was environmentally questionable, if not unfeasible.And why the Sierra Club takes this position on ethanol:
"The Sierra Club opposes ethanol because it takes more energy to create than you get from it," said Jeff Tittel, director of the New Jersey chapter of the national environmental advocacy group. "It's really a subsidy for agri-business."Not to mention that:
Ethanol also provides less mileage than gasoline, requiring more fuel to be purchased.
New Jersey's not buying Bush plans for ethanol, Herb Jackson. The Record (25 Jan 07)
Not only does ethanol require more energy to produce than it can yield, but it has other environmentally damaging effects. Ethanol can increase the solubility of pollutants in water, therefore degrading our water systems.