Ethanol mandate is relic of a different time: Column

Be careful what you wish for, which sums up the federal Renewable Fuel Standard, better known as the ethanol mandate.

Back in 2004, when a proposed biofuels mandate was just picking up steam, environmentalists thought they had a can’t-miss idea. Ethanol was supposed to help improve air quality, reduce carbon emissions and increase wildlife habitat. A major environmental organization, the Natural Resources Defense Council, even issued a 96-page report in support of ethanol in our gasoline.

The environmental community and the corn growers got their ethanol mandate. Ethanol is now blended into gasoline to account for 10 percent of the motor fuel we consume every day. But the Renewable Fuel Standard has proven to be unwieldy and unnecessary. And it's failed to deliver on any of its environmental promises.

In fact, the environmental groups who lobbied so hard for ethanol creation have now turned on it. The Natural Resources Defense Council even wrote, "the bulk of today’s conventional corn ethanol carries grave risks to the climate, wildlife, waterways and food security." Instead of an environmental solution, the use of corn ethanol has instead created many new environmental problems.

Today, roughly 40 percent of the nation’s corn crop is used to create ethanol.  Millions of acres of once untouched lands have been plowed to accommodate corn ethanol demand. Instead of expanding wildlife habitat, the ethanol mandate is steadily reducing it.

This year's corn crop is expected to be the largest on record. Because growing corn is hard on the soil, farmers have been forced to use more and more fertilizer. Runoff from that fertilizer is adding to a growing dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico that is so low in oxygen that it kills off both fish and wildlife. This dead zone is now estimated to be about 5,000 square miles.

This is a major problem for Mississippi and nearby states.

To make matters worse, corn production has been using up precious groundwater resources in several states at alarming levels. All of these problems would be potentially palatable if the Renewable Fuel Standard and ethanol were really needed. But they aren't.

When the RFS was made law in 2007, it was a well-intentioned proposal to deal with real and pressing energy shortages. Biofuel was seen as a silver bullet to reduce our growing dependence on foreign oil, as our own oil production seemed in permanent decline.

But our energy realities have been turned upside down. The shale revolution — which caught just about everyone by surprise — has turned the U.S. into the world's largest combined producer of oil and natural gas. Domestic oil production increased by more than 4 million barrels per day. Our energy security, once an economic Achilles heel, has been transformed into a major strength.

The ethanol mandate is a relic of a different time. If the justification for its creation no longer exists and if it’s doing lasting environmental damage, why is it still law? Unfortunately, that’s easy — someone is making a lot of money, in this case many corn growers and ethanol producers.

The ethanol lobby is fighting tooth and nail to keep the RFS mandate on the books, but common sense must prevail. Congress must step up to the plate and admit the ethanol mistake. It's past time for it to go.

J. Winston Porter is an energy and environmental consultant in Savannah, Georgia.  Earlier, he was an assistant administrator of the EPA.