>>http://www.fayobserver.com/article?id=279628
>>
>>That is 10 miles from me.
>
>
>The ethanol boom is good news for corn farmers, bad news for consumers. As you might imagine, there has been lots of ongoing news coverage about it around here. The Tribune had an article the other day saying it is behind not only the surge in corn prices but also the prices of milk and bread.

Just like the times of early industrial revolution in the UK, when "the sheep ate the people". This time it's "the SUV ate your breakfast".

Long before this I've read that whatever you eat here, it's 99% based on two things: oil and corn. Corn is the primary feed for all farm animals, i.e. the primary source of beef, pork and poultry. Also, corn derivatives are used all over the food chain, as starch, sweetener, oil/fats or whatever. The remaining foodstuffs (other grains, fruit and vegetables) are equally dependent on oil for their production - for machinery, transportation, drying etc. Now some of the corn is diverted for production of ethanol, which supposedly replaces some of the oil (but requires just as much for production/extraction), which will supposedly alleviate the dependency on Arab or Venezuelan oil.

So the demand for corn is artificially increased; its price will rise and so will the production costs of its derivatives - milk, meat, corn syrup based drinks, etc. (I'm not expecting the latter to change retail price, as their production cost is less than their advertising cost ;>)

By some calculations, the US would be completely independent from Arab oil if the SUVs and personal trucks were replaced with normal cars. But these calculations are obsolete - I remember I read that along with the last of the y2k predctions. So XX century... the reality today must be completely different.