Gasoline prices are high and global warming is a problem. The need for alternative energy sources is being broadly felt, but what those alternatives should be is up for debate. Ethanol is a popular option, but many from left to right have their doubts.

The Nation carried a piece Monday by Nicholas Von Hoffman on the “Ethanol Hoax.” Hoffman argues that ethanol is little more than a political ploy to make it look as though the government is doing something about global warming: “Ethanol will stop global warming, and as an added plus, it will make the agribusiness interests richer and insure that the GOP carries the corn-growing states of the Midwest. Talk about living happily ever after!”

Vahan Janjigian agrees that ethanol is no solution, particularly from an economic point of view. “Growing demand for ethanol is pushing up food prices all over the world,” he writes. Furthermore Janjigian argues that since the U.S. will not be able to produce enough ethanol to supply its energy needs it will need to import ethanol. By continuing the energy import economy Janjigian says that we will merely be replacing OPEC with a new Organization of Ethanol Exporting Countries (OEEC). He suggests that energy conservation is a more viable alternative.

Writing in The Weekly Standard, Jaime Darenblum argues that ethanol could bolster U.S. foreign policy. Ethanol could both strengthen our relationship with key South American countries like Brazil and give the U.S. more choice in energy trading partners since corn production is not as geographically limited as oil is.