The Ethanol Buzz

Renewed interest on ethanol, a grain alcohol, dominated the news coverage of President Bush's visit to Brazil recently. It was on NPR every 15 minutes during All Things Considered when I drove home

Is ethanol green? Is ethanol good for us? The answer largely depends on what you consider to be part of the equation. The primary economic motivation of ethanol fuel is to rid of dependency on oil, mostly the imported portion in the United States. Ethanol is also touted as "clean burning" because of its low pollution.

However, the environmentally challenged drivers should think twice before jumping onto the ethanol bandwagon. As I have understood it, producing ethanol can be quite an ethical dilemma.

Brazil, the largest producer of ethanol in the world, makes ethanol from fermented sugar. Where does sugar come from? Sugar canes. Although the majority of the Amazon Rainforest deforested has been turned into grazing land for cattle, I would not be surprised if the same is and will be done to clean out land to grow sugar canes. According to Wikipedia article, ethanol releases 30% less energy than gasoline per volume.

This means we need to grow more corn and sugar cane in order to produce enough ethanol to fully replenish the current consumption of gasoline. There just simply isn’t enough land for growing those crops right now.

Obviously, deforestation has had a dramatic effect on earth climate. It also has had a positive effect on the rural economy of Brazil. It’s just funny to see the media jumping on something “cool” just because it seems like a nice alternative to gasoline fuel. The harsh fact of going true green is you simply cannot accomplish this without an implicit negative effect on the environment while also steering clear of negative economic effects. It is a give-take dillema politicians don’t want to talk about and that the media has a hard time conveying.

Ethanol may give us a buzz in the head, but it is still not worth the hangover for me.

Tour Groups Wanted

My boyfriend, his sister and I are going to Washington, DC for a weekend trip in April. So naturally, I started looking to see if we could get tours of government buildings while visiting the capitol.

Back in 1995, on my first day of immigrating to the U.S., my Dad and I visited the White House. It was a great day. I hadn't even had a chance to eat at McDonald's and yet I was already inside the building where the American president worked and slept.

Fast forward 12 years, things aren't as simple. According to the White House website, tours are only given to groups of 10 or larger. Plus, I have to contact a congressman 2 months prior in order to get a reservation to go in. Not going to happen for us.

I then checked the Pentagon website to see if we could go inside. Its website states you must be in a group of 5 and larger, and with an educational, governmental or military institution. And get this, also church groups? Anyone up for joining the Church of Cecily? I'll be glad to take my parisoners on a tour inside the American military headquarters.

When did government buildings become so inaccessible to the common people? My guess is 9/11. Is it because the government functions more efficiently with less "disruption" from the outside? Sounds awefully untransparent to me. I feel now I have less chance of seeing the American government in action as a U.S. citizen compared to a decade ago when I was just fresh off the plane from China. Weird? Definitely.