Michael Swickard
Shuckins! At my gas station this week was the dreaded note on the pump: “This gasoline now contains ethanol.” I have changed stations several times this last year to keep from buying E10, gasoline laced with 10 percent ethanol. This move to ethanol laced gasoline is political in nature. I have three major objections to being forced to use E10.
First, the BTU (energy) content of E10 is not as high as regular gasoline, so I surrender gas mileage. I already drive carefully and under the speed limit to boost gas mileage so this will not “break the bank” in my life. However, I do not want to spend money foolishly fuelish.
Further, my 1998 Mercury Grand Marquis reacts to E10 with a warning to “Check Engine” which means the oxygen sensors in my car puke with E10. It has always done so and the advice of my mechanic has been to not put ethanol in my gas tank. When I put regular gas back in the warning light goes off. So, why should I pay money to have a problem with my car and lose gas mileage to boot?
Second, the use of the food crop corn to make fuel raises the price of corn-based food since the production of corn competes with the federally subsidized ethanol production. Farmers weigh the value of producing corn for food or for fuel where they get a federal ethanol subsidy. The reduction of corn in our food chain increases the cost of food both for humans and for animal feed. Increasing the cost of feeding animals results in higher animal-based food costs to consumers.
Taxpayers subsidize the production of ethanol, which in turn raises the cost of our food. While food cost is not a problem for me, I do not want to spend the extra money needlessly. Importantly, the escalating food costs are very problematic for the more fragile families in New Mexico.
More so, this artificial increase in food prices have causes riots in Mexico and in other countries with large populations who are mired in poverty, since the increase in food prices is very real to those people and quite catastrophic. There is no reason their corn-based food should increase in price.
Finally, closer to home, New Mexico uses its oil industry to fund education. The use of E10 fuels subtracts money from our schools because the 10 percent of ethanol used in gasoline is mainly produced in the “corn belt.” There is no reason to use less New Mexico produced petroleum to satisfy political whims.
From voluntary to mandatory
Understand, I have no objection whatsoever to E10 being sold. Anyone who wants to drive with E10, or E85 for that matter, is free to do so. My objection is that E10 is being forced upon me because it is getting harder and harder to find gasoline without ethanol. While we can talk about ethanol being cleaner burning I am not convinced it is critical when compared to the harm done to food production and New Mexico schools.
Likewise, there is a move to mandate paying for recycling when some citizens do not wish to recycle. In Las Cruces the city council is considering mandating the payment of recycling for every citizen even if some citizens do not wish to recycle. Either directly or indirectly every citizen pays for recycling because recycling does not pay for itself. If recycling made dollars and sense it would not have to be subsidized.
It is important to note that often with government what starts as “voluntary” moves quickly to mandatory, as friends of mine in other cities have found. I have a friend who must separate into six barrels paper, glass, metal, garbage, and two other things which I do not remember. I just remember when I visit he is perpetually upset by all of the care he must take in separating everything he uses. His garage is taken up by the mandatory recycling which he remembers WAS voluntary when it started.
Is it certain that if the Las Cruces City Council starts a recycling program with mandatory payment it will end up as obtrusive as my friend’s? No, but that is the way to bet.
Swickard is a weekly columnist for this site. You can reach him at michael@swickard.com.
Swickard bio │ Archives │ Feed