In regards to the criticism of the use of ethanol, both the farmers and the ethanol producers have weighed in on the debate. Recently, lawmakers and several scientists had blamed the use of food-based bio-fuels such as corn and soybeans to be used to make ethanol for the rise in food prices.
The global network of CGIAR comprised of scientists that use science to fight world hunger recently brought up the predicament of fighting high fuel costs versus fighting world hunger. They have clashed with President Bush, who had urged the increase of ethanol use and production to fight the high gas prices and to protect the national energy security.
Some scientists have said that fighting world hunger takes higher priority than fighting high gas prices. The scientists have said that the production of food-based bio-fuels contributes to higher food prices. While those that support the production of ethanol explain that the use of corn is for livestock feed, experts have said that it causes higher prices for livestock feed. Then, they add that in turn results into higher food prices.
However, those results have come under attack from the farmers and ethanol producers. In Washington, DC, the farmers clashed with the lawmakers. They have said that the main reason that the food prices rise is due to the increase of fuel. That does carry weight. It has been explained in the past whenever the price of fuel goes up, the price of groceries increases three-fold.
To the farmers and ethanol producers, bio-fuels are not to blame for the increasing prices of corn and grain. They stand by the argument that the increasing fuel costs played an instrumental role to the rise of food costs.
But, it does not end the debate on what and how much the impact that bio-fuels has on the price of food. So far, the figures have been conflicting with one another. The figures from the ethanol industry say it is a small percentage. But, various groups across the world say the figures are much higher.
This is a possible sub-debate in the main debate of fighting world hunger or fighting rising gas prices. At the same time, there is the debate on what is responsible for the rise in food prices: rising fuel costs or the use of bio-fuels?
As alternative fuel sources will be an important issue in the general elections, these two types of debates may possibly come up. So far, alternative fuels can be linked with the economy, which is the top of the minds of most voters. At the same time, this can be tied into Iraq and national security, the main platform of presumed GOP presidential nominee Senator John McCain of Arizona.
This probably will not be the last time that we will hear these arguments. As these arguments can easily be tied in hot button topics, it looks to be inevitable that such arguments cannot be avoided.
On one spectrum there is the argument of fighting world hunger vs. fighting gas prices, on the other side there is the argument of what really causes the rise in food costs.
Leave Your Comments