Being from the Midwest and from a long generation of family farmers, and currently own a 2000 acres farm in the Midwest, I think I that the the use of ethanol is not a big problem
In regards to the energy yield from corn, it is lower than some other crops, such as sugar beets and sugar cane, but the percentage of land in the USA that can grow corn vs. the percentage of land suitable for growing sugar is vastly different. The motive behind ethanol is not solely as a cleaner energy source, it is also designed to ween us off of foreign energy supply. If we were to switch to sugar crop as our main ethanol grower, then we would just become dependent upon another country to provide us our 'oil'. We can grow all the corn we want here in the country.
In regards to the economy behind it, demand for corn for ethanol has brought about quite a drastic change in the farmers' economy. Families currently have flourished because of the higher yields from corn production via new technologies, as well as the higher prices that are a result of the increased demand. Many families, including my own, have gone for decades barely scraping by on what we can, many years taking losses because of poor growth and low prices. This past year was one of the best years for corn and soybeans in recent memory to anybody, and it has allowed lots of farms to pay off debts owed to banks on their lands. It's really helped the small economy in the area. Corn futures markets are looking good through December of 2009, so expect that market to do well for a while. It has beaten the current recession this nation is in, if you want to call it that.
In regards to area used to grow corn, the Midwest farming market is NOT running at full capacity. There are still tens of thousands of acres that don't grow anything on their land. Just drive around and you will see that there is much room to grow. My parents back yard is an acre, and its just grass. It could easily be converted to produce crops. If we needed to step up output, we certainly can
In regards to corn farming being hard on soil, this is an irrelevant argument. Anyone who has any experience with corn knows this and also knows how to solve the problem. It's called Ammonium Nitrate. In addition to being from a farming family, I am also working on a PhD in chemistry, so I know a little something about the science behind this, and it is one of the most inexpensive chemicals produced today and costs very little to purchase.
If you don't want to buy fertilizer, you don't have to. Land for corn growth will produce corn for about 2 years. In the second year, you will see slightly lower yield as some of the ground nutrients have been used up. To counter removal of the nutrients, farmers do what is known as crop rotation. After 2 years, corn land is converted to soybean land, which is a legume type crop that can replace nutrients back into the grown, allowing them it to be used for corn growing in another season. This is basic farming 101 and offsets the need for so much fertilizer to be grown.
I certainly don't believe that other crop alternatives like switchgrass should be ruled out, but that shouldn't be a reason to scrap everything altogether because some people want to use corn. "Corn Businesses" are my father and grandfather, not some nameless conglomerate. They work very hard to support our family. I think it would be wise to take a second look at the advantages that this has brought to EVERYONE.
10% ethanol blend in gas has improved gas mileage in our vehicles. It does burn cleaner than longer chained carbons because of reduced cracking. In the state of Missouri, all grades of gasoline are required to have 10% ethanol in them, in all gas stations, and Iowa I believe has done or is going to do the same. Avoid those states if you do not want ethanol blend gas.
Pure ethanol as a fuel will require a different engine, and I am not a mechanic, but I haven't noticed any negative side effects as a result of a 10% ethanol blend gas in my car engines.
