Farmer Leroy Perkins stands in his field of grass which is part of the Conservation Reserve Program near Corydon, Iowa. Perkins must make a decision to either leave the highly erodible field in grass or break ground to plant corn which is at high prices in part because of the ethanol mandate.
Photo: AP
[From article]
Agriculture companies like Monsanto Co. and DuPont Pioneer, which stood to make millions off an ethanol boom, told the government those numbers were too low.
They predicted that genetically modified seeds — which they produce — would send yields skyrocketing. With higher yields, farmers could produce more corn on less land, reducing the environmental effects.
Documents show the White House budget office also suggested the EPA raise its yield assumptions.
When the final rule came out, the EPA and Agriculture officials added a new “high yield case scenario” that assumed 230 bushels per acre.
The flaw in those assumptions, independent scientists knew, was that a big increase in corn prices would encourage people to farm in less hospitable areas like Wayne County, which could never produce such large yields.
[. . .]
When Congress passed the ethanol mandate, it required the EPA to thoroughly study the effects on water and air pollution. In his recent speech to ethanol lobbyists, Vilsack was unequivocal about those effects:
“There is no question air quality, water quality is benefiting from this industry,” he said.
But the administration never actually conducted the required air and water studies to determine whether that’s true.
In an interview with the AP after his speech, Vilsack said he didn’t mean that ethanol production was good for the air and water. He simply meant that gasoline mixed with ethanol is cleaner than gasoline alone.
[. . .]
In the Midwest, meanwhile, scientists and conservationists are sounding alarms.
Nitrogen fertilizer, when it seeps into the water, is toxic. Children are especially susceptible to nitrate poisoning, which causes “blue baby” syndrome and can be deadly.
http://nypost.com/2013/11/12/the-secret-dirty-cost-of-obamas-green-power-push/
The secret, dirty cost of Obama’s green power push
By Associated Press
November 12, 2013 | 8:58am
No comments:
Post a Comment