Let small farmers prosper for once

High fuel prices increase all food prices. Demand for corn for ethanol increases some food prices. Higher grain prices put money in farmers ' pockets, not those of "big oil. "

For the first time since the 1970s, farmers are making money on commodities at market prices, saving taxpayers the subsidy payment. America 's food policy has brought commodities to market at below the cost of production, enriching large processors while keeping small family farmers near the subsistence level. By exporting commodities at these prices, we have kept Third World countries from profiting from their commodities as well.

Our cheap food has not been as cheap as it 's seemed, our taxes have subsidized it. The food and protein producers who have received their inputs at below the cost of production are now complaining about farmers making money on the market.

Are American farmers, especially small farmers, responsible for providing commodities at below the cost of production? When commodity prices are being driven upward by demand from ethanol, international demand for protein, higher fuel prices and investment speculation, why is ethanol demand the only driver being decried when it is the one that has the most positive economic benefit for our domestic economy?

John Biondi, president, C 5-6 Technologies, Middleton

Cellulosic ethanol is way of the future

The question over corn-based fuel alcohol economics might soon be moot. Commercial cellulosic ethanol could well be just a few years away.

Concentrated acid hydrolysis of cellulosic materials has long been known for its high product purity and nearly complete yield. A sulfuric acid process, first explored decades ago at Japan 's Hokkaido University, has recently been further developed both in Japan and at Arkenol, Inc., in California.

BlueFire Ethanol, Arkenol 's licensee, is building several commercial-scale cellulosic ethanol plants in California and Japan said to be able to produce 200-proof ethanol from, at first, municipal solid waste. This will use no process energy source other than the non-cellulosic fraction of the waste itself.

Cellulosic ethanol will, of course, require a shakedown period, but the technology looks promising. From a business viewpoint, it certainly is nice to have a large preexisting market for the alcohol fuel product. We have the corn-based fuel alcohol industry to thank for developing this market.

-- Tony Finch, Madison

Ethanol production a boon to Wisconsin

Biofuels, of which grain ethanol is a first step, are important for our economy. Even if it just broke even, the dollars this industry will contribute to our economy are significant, and the jobs it creates are good.

While grain may be the beginning source of this technology, it will be followed by cellulose utilization in the manufacture of fuels. Currently recycled grease, soybeans and grains are being used to develop fuels. In the future we 'll see wood chips or sawdust and recycled waste timber products, switchgrass, corn stalks and grains used to develop fuel products to blend with petroleum products.

I would rather see our farmers generate income from these sources than our two largest suppliers of foreign oil and gas -- Canada and Mexico -- and much more than OPEC nations.

We have ethanol plants in Cambria, Friesland and Jefferson, all within two hours of Madison, plus continued efforts to develop a soybean diesel fuel and a used cooking oil plant.

Regarding production facilities, this industry is one of the cleanest I know of, with the potential for extremely low emissions. They utilize the generated waste products (steam, spent mash and carbon dioxide) to make other marketable products.

There are still subsidies to get the industry rolling, but soon the industry will be able to stand on its own. Research is ongoing at UW-Madison and will continue to be supported. The potential for jobs and income is great, and it 's just the kind of business we should encourage in Wisconsin.

-- John H. Pickle Jr., Lodi

Don 't blame ethanol; blame cost of oil

Regarding whether or not overplanting of ethanol crops raises our food costs, that is not the problem. The cost of oil is the bigger problem. Of course, trucking, planting and labor costs all contribute to the problem.

Ethanol will use corn, but it will make us less dependent on oil. It is also good for our economy and is a renewable resource.

Making ethanol the scapegoat is foolish. We have the ability to increase our food supply very quickly and we have a lot of land that is out of production. So I don 't feel we are in danger of a shortage of food because of ethanol.

-- Mrs. Robert Hazen, Bagley

Eschew corn for sugar-crop ethanol

Ethanol is a valid fuel. The Brazilians have used it for many decades, with GM, Ford, Mercedes, VW, Chrysler and others manufacturing cars there to use it. The big difference is that Brazil uses sugar cane to make the ethanol.

Here in the U.S., lobbyists for the sugar industry have so hamstrung the market that we can 't use cane or sugar beets for ethanol. It 's ridiculous to use wood, corn, grass or other substances to make ethanol when the high sugar in cane and beets is far more efficient. The lobbyists have made corn the choice for ethanol at the expense of our food sources. Let 's go for ethanol, but only from sugar crops.

-- Robert Maeglin, Wonewoc

Ethanol impacts farm subsidies and waste

Ethanol could be part of a solution that takes the American farmer off subsidies. What used to be excess farm produce purchased by our government -- only to be given away or dumped -- could now be used rather than wasted.

Land on which farmers are paid by our government to not plant could now be put back into production. Subsidy monies could be used to reduce taxes, or be given to the "poor oil men " to further subsidize their markets. Maybe then they 'd give us a break at the pump.

Is the price of food going up because of ethanol? Let 's think logically for a moment. High fuel prices hit everyone -- the guy who grows and harvests the seed, the guy who transports it, the wholesaler who supplies seed to the retailer, the farmer, the folks who transports the harvested crop and the guy who processes and transports it to the retailers.

Fuel costs are the main culprit, and the oil companies would love to have it blamed on ethanol because they don 't want the competition. So, what 's new.

-- Brian Brown, DeForest

Need corn version of Boston Tea Party

Corn is for eating. Years ago America had a war over tea. Is the next one near? Are the Washington big-shots like the British? God help us.

-- Dom Conforti, Beaver Dam

Rethink our farm subsidy policies

Sunday Forum columnist Bob Stallman, president of the American Farm Bureau Federation, says that besides converting corn to fuel ethanol, factors such as drought and the growing affluence and demand for food in India and China also play major roles in skyrocketing food prices.

All that 's true, but what Stallman failed to mention is that growing corn for ethanol is the only one of those factors resulting from the overzealous and misguided strategy of federal and state mandates, subsidies, protective tariffs, and tax credits that has created what is an entirely policy-driven "demand " for corn ethanol.

We can do little about people in India and China wanting to improve their quality of life, but we can (and should) alter those ill-advised policies that have created a completely artificial "demand " for fuel ethanol made from corn.

-- Gary Dikkers, Madison

Consider hemp for ethanol production

The answer about growing food crops for fuel is a no-brainer. If you have 1,000 acres of land and you grow food on it, you get a price for 1,000 acres of food. If you sell 500 acres for fuel and 500 for food, there is less food and the price goes up.

Here 's a better question: If there is an energy crisis and if fossil fuels pollute, should the ban on industrial hemp be lifted?

You ask if growing this crop will reduce food crops? Hemp can be grow on marginal land that will not support food crops and on soil banks. You get several times the ethanol per acre from hemp than from corn, and it doesn 't need the chemicals to grow. Research shows thousands of commercial uses and it doesn 't pollute like fossil fuels. Why can 't we grow it?

-- Carl Pawlik, Madison

Corn can be used for food and fuel

Ethanol isn 't a "food or fuel " choice. The corn most Midwest farmers grow is used to produce ethanol, in processed food or livestock feed. It isn 't fed directly to consumers.

One bushel of corn provides 31.5 pounds of starch or 33 pounds of sweetener or 2.8 gallons of ethanol, plus 17.5 pounds of dried distiller grains for animal feed or 13.5 pounds of gluten feed, plus 2.6 pounds of gluten meal for animal feed and 1.5 pounds of corn oil.

Without ethanol extending our natural resources, energy prices will only continue to soar, driving up food prices in the process.

-- Nancy Kavazanjian, Beaver Dam

Today 's international market a factor, too

Sunday Forum columnist David A. Ridenour blames ethanol for increased food prices, but fails to acknowledge other factors.

World population grew by two billion people between 1975 and 2000. Unlike my father and grandfather, today 's farmers produce for both a domestic and a competitive, growing international market.

A large portion of America 's consumer items -- clothing, electronics, automobiles, etc. -- are produced in China, India and other developing countries that have a growing middle class who demand more meat and dairy in their diets. Meat consumption per capita in China has doubled in the last generation. And a multi-year drought in Australia reduced global wheat supplies, impacting bread and all bakery products.

The greatest factor influencing food prices is the cost of oil. Rising fuel costs affect all stages of the food chain from producer to consumer. Thank goodness we have E-85 and 10 percent ethanol blend gasoline available. Without these options, what would 100 percent gasoline cost?

It may be politically convenient to blame ethanol for rising food prices, but it is not accurate.

-- Pat O 'Brien, Fitchburg, president, Dane County Farm Bureau

Easy - but wrong - to blame corn use

Those enlightened readers who don 't believe that ethanol has single-handedly skewed the prices of groceries, ag commodities and fuel prices are correct.

This debate has been fueled by speculation spread by "big oil " and other ethanol antagonists. It has taken on an emotional, rather than factual, tone, according to a recent statistical analysis by Informa Economics which found a "weak correlation " between corn prices and overall food costs. It said just 4 percent of the change in food prices could be attributed to fluctuations in the corn price.

Despite current volatile markets, the "farm value " of raw commodities used in foods accounts for only 19 percent of total U.S. food costs, down from 37 percent in 1973. The remaining portion of what is known as the marketing bill includes costs of labor, packaging, transportation, energy, profits, advertising, depreciation, rent, interest, repairs, business taxes and other costs not attributable to basic ag commodities.

I 'm not saying that ethanol has no effect on the price of other products, but blaming corn-based ethanol for all of the inflation associated with food prices fails to consider all the market forces at work.

-- Richard Gorder, Mineral Point, vice president, Wisconsin Farm Bureau Federation 

World needs food, but U.S. needs fuel

Last year U.S. farmers like myself planted 19 percent more corn acres than in 2006, and fewer soybeans. By doing that, we produced about the same amount of food -- 50 bushels per acre of soybeans produce about the same amount of protein and oil as 150 bushels per acre of corn.

The difference is that two-thirds of the corn kernel (about 100 bushels per acre) is starch, which can be made into 420 gallons of ethanol per acre. That starch, converted to ethanol, was essentially "free " because it costs about the same to grow and process soybeans as it does corn.

The world is hungry for the meat, milk and eggs that livestock produce from the corn we grow, but the U.S. is also hungry for home-grown fuel, like ethanol.

-- Bob Oleson, Palmyra

Farmers can provide both food and fuel

This food vs. fuel debate is ridiculous. American farmers can, and do, both feed the world and grow a renewable fuel source. Proof is the 1.4 billion bushel corn surplus we have in storage in the U.S. today.

When I fill my vehicle, I 'd much rather be supporting Renew and other ethanol plants than Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez 's regime or any other foreign entity that controls this world 's oil.

The American consumer must understand that biofuels are good for our nation 's economy in many ways and we aren 't taking food from the mouths of the hungry.

-- Charles W. Hammer, Beaver Dam

Use only non-food sources for ethanol

The making of ethanol using corn or any other grain in the food chain should be outlawed. A program on the History Channel showed that the making of ethanol with corn saves nothing and creates a burden on the food chain. All that 's accomplished is raising of grain prices.

Other experts say ethanol does not save on greenhouse gasses at all but produces just as much as gasoline.

But if we must produce ethanol, try switchgrass or other substances not a part of our food chain. Switchgrass produces many times more gallons of ethanol per acre than corn.

The real problem is the burning of fossil fuels. We need another way of producing energy. The other problem no one wants to address is our overpopulating the world. With fewer people, we would use less of everything.

-- Ralph Kleeber, Reedsburg

Ethanol 's available affordable, American

Oil costs more than $100 a barrel and one major disruption could send it past $200. Oil has a strangle-hold on our economy, and even though our thirst for oil makes us dependent on less-than-friendly nations, some people want a home-grown product like ethanol to be a whipping boy.

Corn ethanol is not the solution, but is certainly part of the solution. There 's also great potential for cellulosic ethanol, which will be studied at UW-Madison. But for now, corn ethanol is an efficient fuel source that is available, affordable and American.

I would much rather support a home-grown fuel industry that displaces some of our oil imports, helps lower fuel prices, improves the environment and creates jobs in rural America, than send my money to build another castle in the Middle East.

-- Jerry Bradley, Sun Prairie

With modifications, ethanol 's way to go

Ethanol production -- which saves money, lessens our dependency on foreign oil and boosts the economy -- is the way to go, but the question is not whether to make ethanol or not but what to make it with.

Corn, while appealing to farmers, is a poor choice. Corn already has a sizable market in our country and many uses. It 's hard to find a product in your pantry that does not have a corn by-product, corn starch, corn syrup and so on in it.

Economics tells us that when demand goes up, unless supply goes up too, cost is sure to rise. If the cost of corn goes up, which it has in the past two years, it trickles down into all these products that have corn by-products in them, as well as corn-fed livestock.

The solution is switchgrass and plant waste, which are not a staple of food production (no costs to drive up) and have been shown in some studies to produce ethanol with three times the energy.

We are on the right track with ethanol; we just need to modify our approach.

-- Travis Ayers, Blue Mounds

U.S. must repeal restrictive policies

I don 't want to hear bellyaching from liberals and environmentalists (mostly Democrats) about how much gas costs. They are the reason we are in this predicament because they stymied time and again those who saw this coming for the last 20 or 30 years.

We have to become energy independent immediately. We can 't conserve our way to growth. We should have been drilling for oil on our territory, mining for clean coal and developing alternate energies.

Food prices are soaring because transportation is costly, because gas is costly. That 's costly because we are dependent on OPEC, Canada and Mexico for much of our oil. Our government is subsidizing corn growers diverting that crop for alternate fuel. And not only can we not drill for oil in our territory, but new oil refineries can 't be built because of government regulations.

There is a place for good environmentalism, but what the U.S. is purposefully doing to itself is nonsense.

Governmental micro management of oil, coat and other energy sources is not the solution. We need a government that will allow the free market to climb out of the hole we have dug. Repeal the oppressive regulations.

-- J. Fall, New Glarus