Skip this site's navigation and go to its main content


Receive Updates From Heritage

Receive Updates From Heritage

The Heritage Foundation
Leadership for America

Our Vision

Building an America where freedom, opportunity, prosperity, and civil society flourish.

About The Heritage Foundation

Founded in 1973, The Heritage Foundation is a research and educational institution—a think tank—whose mission is to formulate and promote conservative public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense. We believe the principles and ideas of the American Founding are worth conserving and renewing. As policy entrepreneurs, we believe the most effective solutions are consistent with those ideas and principles.


From Biofuels to BioFailure

Posted July 15th, 2008 at 10:41am in Energy and Environment 1 Print This Post Print This Post

It’s hard to find a voice outside the Midwest or Archer Daniels Midland buildings that support the use of biofuels and ethanol as a means for filling gas tanks. Environmentalists and especially world hunger groups are adamantly expressing their concern about the unintended consequences of biofuels policy.

Christopher Booker and Richard North have a terrific piece in the Telegraph discussing the unique story of biofuels and how this policy went from pipedream to absolute disaster. It chronicles the history of biofuel policy and how its implementation has led to rising food prices. They note that

According to the World Bank’s top economist, Don Mitchell, biofuels had been responsible for three-quarters of the 140 per cent rise in world food prices between 2002 and 2008.”

Oxfam International says that these policies have pushed 30 million people into poverty. Even the head of Britain’s Renewable Fuels Agency is calling for a change:

So devastating has been this onslaught on biofuels that last Monday, Ed Gallagher, chairman of our new Renewable Fuels Agency, published a report recommending that Britain should drastically review its policy, slowing the introduction of biofuels and concentrating on “second-generation biofuels”, such as crop wastes and wood chips, that do not compete with food production.”

One alternative source of energy that already provides 20 percent of the nation’s electricity is nuclear power. British Prime Minister Gordon Brown wants eight new reactors to come on board by 2015 and says the sky’s the limit in terms of building new nuclear.

It’s time politicians here at home seriously consider changing its biofuel policy and repeal the ethanol mandate along with any tariffs that discourage imports. Furthermore, they should follow U.S. Ander Crenshaw’s lead in advocating nuclear energy; today he wrote a column supporting the four new reactors that could come to Florida pending approval from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. If anything, it is important that Congress not overlook the benefits of nuclear energy when debating CO2 regulation.

Tags: , ,

One Response to “From Biofuels to BioFailure”

  1. Harry in Chicago on at said:

    To most liberals (socialists) the ends justify the means. At the heart of our economic problems is the high price of gasoline which undoubtedly has an effect on every aspect of our economy. However, they are enjoying the current prices as a way to ween the world off of oil and damn the consequences. The high price of food is a direct result of this liberal philosophy. They run off half-cocked wanting to solve all the world’s problems without thinking of the consequences. They are unable to see the forest for the trees. Liberals wiil ruin economies and send millions into poverty as long as our dependence on oil is destroyed. What folly!

Leave a Comment

In order to leave a comment, you must supply information for all of the required fields below (which are indicated by bold text).

Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.