Wednesday, Feb. 7, 2007 | 7:22 a.m.
Clarence Lanzrath's Feb. 4 letter, "Things to consider about ethanol," made several good points. However, I believe Mr. Lanzrath is overlooking several valid reasons why ethanol production should be continued as we pursue energy independence in the United States.
Mr. Lanzrath is correct when he says that the use of ethanol is not a 100 percent substitute for gasoline, but it can be one of several types of energy sources that will go a long way toward decreasing America's dependence on oil, particularly foreign oil. Along with ethanol, other sources of energy such as solar, wind, hydrogen and nuclear can be used to decrease our dependence on oil. Developing these forms of energy may be a boon to the economy as well.
Mr. Lanzrath is correct in pointing out that the cost of producing ethanol can drive up the cost of ethanol as a fuel additive for gasoline, but that is a problem that will be solved as more research and development take place.
Mr. Lanzrath's contention that making ethanol from corn will drive up the cost of corn on the world market is a valid concern, but I need to remind all the "ethanol doubters" out there that ethanol can be made from a variety of agriculture products. In addition to corn, any plant high in cellulose content, such as switchgrass or sugar cane, can be used to make ethanol.
I agree with Mr. Lanzrath's assertion that the wind-power project in Palm Springs, Calif., was a disaster, but there are many other examples of successful wind-power projects in not only California but also around the world that give credence to continued wind-power research.
In short, our determination to become energy independent should include a variety of alternative fuels, and ethanol should be one of those fuels.
Larry Burgess, Henderson
archive
