Good stuff.  Let's just be clear here, corn ethanol is a dumb idea and doesn't make economic sense to the producer if the U.S. eliminates the subsidies or the tariffs on Brazilian ethanol.  Ethanol made from sugar cane is a great idea, is economical and energy efficient.

See this recent article on the front page of WSJ (paid subscription required).  Big multinationals like Cargill, Bunge and ADM are trying very hard to get into the Brazilian market.  Bunge supposedly was prepared to pay $775 million for one of the largest sugar plantation/mill/refinery in Brazil, but the owners wouldn't sell...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118939098644522250.html

Don't ever underestimate the power of the farming lobby in the U.S.  The government seems beholden to them.  I've read that corn prices are so high that some U.S, farmers have abandonned the centuries old practice of crop rotation so as to plant corn on corn.  This may have catastrophic implications on soil erosion, and other insects and fungi that will now be able to take advantage of poor farming practices and really take hold.

Also Brazilian ethanol is so efficient because of the tropical climate that it is a sustainable form of energy, not just low cost.  Ethanol from corn may not be environmentally sustainable to any large degree.  Of course what does the Bush administration do?  Slap tariffs on Brazilian ethanol.

My question in all of this is where were all the scientists if this was known to be a bad idea from the start?  I'm not a scientist, but aren't there enough journalists around that can understand some basic science?  All I had to do was spend a few hours reading about ethanol on-line and I knew it was a flawed idea.

Is this investable?  I would short ethanol producers if I knew of a way.  In the meantime I continue to hold commodities of any sort as the central bankers of the world try to inflate their way out of any number of messes.  I suppose gold will be a terrific investment in the very near future.

In terms of alternative energy, most companies' I've researched are long only on hype.  It's hard to weed out the eventual winners.  I wouldn't invest a dime on hydrogen or Ballard power.  In fact i would short Ballard.  Society will never come up with the money to pay for the immense infrastructure for hydrogen let alone have the energy to produce.  Hydrogen demands too much long term thinking for our governments!  If I had to bet, it would be on the electric car.  The battery technology is making great strides if not already there, so take your pick.

Beezwax

>  I've read that corn prices are so high that some U.S, farmers
>  have abandonned the centuries old practice of crop rotation so as to plant corn on corn. 

Does this mean that next year's corn crop is going to be really low because farmers either:  (1) started their rotation into corn this year, and will go to something else next year;  (2)  doubled down by growing corn the last two years;  (3)  realized they got the shaft by not growing wheat. ?

- Vooch

I'm not making any predictions on corn production for next year.  All i'm saying about an age old practice of crop rotation is that prices have lured some farmers to plant corn and then more corn instead of the more common practice of alternating corn with soybeans for example.  Without an agriculture degree, i don't understand the specifics but it has to do with pathogens as well as soil depletion with regards to nutrients.  Apparantly soybean plants are good at fixing nitrogen in the soil that corn needs so these two plants are complimentary.  There are many examples where monoculture has led to species extinction.

With respect to wheat.  ya baby! i'm long wheat.