855 words on Ethanol

I am going to try make my point easily and painlessly. In keeping up with news, I learned of the Canadian Government’s visionary plan to promote ethanol. I distain politics, but watching a conservative government talk about biofuels fills me with dread.

I place the blame squarely at the feet of our Federal Environment Minister Rona Ambrose. I love life’s absurdities; did you know she is leading a U.N. panel on lowering Carbon Dioxide emissions. Moving on: My first impressions of her was that she was either trying to sell the Canadian government arms or lobbying for the adoption standards abolishing all standards for nuclear plants. Only after did I read the caption introducing me to our new Environmental Minister did I realize she was organizing our country’s assault to save the environment. At this point, I want an advocate for the environment and David Suzuki is looking pretty good. But this is all really here nor there.

To completely reveal the absurdity of decision to promote ethanol the reader must take for granted the Conservative’s blind faith in free-market theory. Short summary: Small government=good; government intervention=bad; giving money to people=bad (how will they ever learn to be motivated individuals?); true=free market solves every problem. Reality is rarely this simple; oh, but it looks so good in a text book!

Facts one and two in the debate are simple; in takes (a lot of) energy to turn grain into ethanol and then get said ethanol to market; and, the real kicker, if you burn ethanol you are still producing carbon dioxide and nasty pollution (abet not as much).

At the moment, Canada is awash in grain, it’s in excess, this same condition exists in the States in regards to corn. The price is falling. What to do? Send it to starving people overseas? No! Form a lobby group! Get the government to spend money and create a market for you!

What free-market theory has to say on this is clear: if a market isn’t self-sustaining, it has absolutely no right to exist. Sure my morals get in the way of such a grim axiom, and fortunately, even Conservatives wince and claim reality is more complex. If you really would like more insight into the failure of the free-market to provide - well, anything - I refer the reader to many careful case studies of the affordable housing situation in Vancouver. Very enlightening. After absorbing this fact, one starts noticing the frays in free-market theory when applied to reality. And I always love making this next point: there is barely a major economic sector in Canada that is without large government subsidies. Aerospace, defense, forestry, health care, fisheries, construction, tourism, agriculture. The economy would grind to a halt without federal help. Maybe the real lesson to learn is that giving money to people in the form of popular social programs=bad; giving money instead to industry=good. So long as it is in complete contradiction with what you purport to believe? How do these people’s heads not explode? Got to love it!

To continue: Despite my cynical tone, I really have no problem that this is going on; but can’t we at least be honest about how our economy works? Must I really be forced to praise the free-market or risk being labelled a "communist-liberal"?

Obvious to me is the fact that the sudden turn toward biofuels is a knee-jerk reaction to high energy prices. Hey, it wasn’t my idea to link the entire prosperity of a global economy to fossil fuels; I’m just living with it. So here’s my suggesting; the great insight of this post. (Get out the blinking lights.)

I really have no problem subsidizing a market for biofuels, except when said program is masquerading as environmental policy. Why doesn’t the whole ethanol program get moved to Industry Canada? It’s obviously a policy meant more to alleviate a pressing economic issue (and pass federal funds to business; the only way it would ever be seriously supported) rather than address an environmental problem. Oh, that sounds bad. I mean, it is a pressing environmental issue as well but the stakes in climate change are too high for me to sing praises of a path that lets us continue our gluttonous consumption of something that is strangling us (and our children I should add).

I am told that one must offer reasonable solutions, and not just heckling from overseas, to be taken seriously. In my defense; I thought moving the ethanol program to Industry Canada was a suggestion? Okay, so why not take a tiny portion of the massive economic success Canada is currently experiencing and spend it on research that will actually make the planet a livable place in the future to spend and enjoy all the amazing tax cuts we are receiving now! Two important things to look for in the direction of said research: One, it lowers our dependency on expensive fossil fuels. Two, doesn’t pollute and release massive amounts of CO2. My lungs are in revolt!

How’s that for visionary? I just saved the Federal Environment Minister a lot of time!