Biofuel vs Food a False Debate?
May 15, 2008 by michaelcecire
Popular Science has a quick blurb about the First Annual BioMass Conference, which, in part, sought to dismiss new controversy about biofuels leading to global high food prices. An excerpt:
More to the point, though, is the mistaken notion that we have to use food crops for fuel production. In test fields in Minnesota, Tilman and his colleagues have found that the best energy yields actually come from native prairie grasses, not corn or soy. And, said Tilman, “there’s a surprising benefit from the mixture of species. Farmers know this from growing pastures. Nobody plants a pasture of a single species. They put out a variety of grasses, legumes…and so on. They do that because that gives them a higher yield.”
This reminds me of an old adage in many public policy circles: economics doesn’t exist; politics doesn’t exist; there is only the political economy. Here is a case where that maxim most certainly applies; although many people are very well aware, the US farming lobby no less, that biofuels from corn and soy are inferior to other crops like switchgrass and sugar, US agricultural policy actively and inappropriately props up corn prices by subsidizing its cultivation for ethanol.
So yes, biofuel itself is not the problem - and will likely be an integral part of the solution - but to apologize for stratospheric food prices because ‘corn ain’t that good anyway,’ is absolutely unhelpful.
