The Rolling Stone bracingly evicerates the entire ethanol business model and environmental raison d'etre.
Then a corn lobbyist responds with one of the most breathtakingly pompous and crudely contemptuous letters you will ever read. It's so hilarious you have to wonder if it's a parody. The letter starts with calling the Rolling Stone reporter, the magazine and all it's readers shallow hipsters, goes on to imply that they are all commies like gasp...Hugo Chavez..., and goes downhill from there.
Meanwhile British scientists condemn EU policies of supporting the ethanol industry as a wrong headed approach to global warming, they recommend re-forestation as a far more effective government priority.
The EU target of ensuring 10% of petrol and diesel comes from renewable sources by 2020 is not an effective way to curb carbon emissions, researchers say.
A team of UK-based scientists suggested that reforestation and habitat protection was a better option. Writing in Science, they said forests could absorb up to nine times more CO2 than the production of biofuels could achieve on the same area of land.
The growth of biofuels was also leading to more deforestation, they added. "The prime reason for the renewables obligation was to mitigate carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions," said Renton Righelato, one of the study's co-authors.
"In our view this is a mistaken policy because it is less effective than reforesting," he told BBC News.