2. Corn profits stay in America. I'm glad some of this money is going it our tax system/farmers pockets instead of countires that don't like us.
I usually find myself agreeing with stevencrosbie but not in this case. Ethanol for fuel is being subsidized massively by the federal government. Just look at any of the coverage of the Iowa caucuses and you'll see that virtually any candidate of note went out of his/her way to praise government subsidies for corn based ethanol.
The highest and best use of corn based ethanol is as bourbon.
As a fuel, it takes more energy to produce the ethanol from corn than we get from the ethanol. The article is old and the prices low by today's standards, but this guy had it right way back in 2001.
http://www.news.cornell.edu/releases/aug01/corn-basedethanol.hrs.html
And the massive amounts of water are required not just to grow the corn, but also for the fermentation and isolation of the ethanol.
And as far as dollars staying in America, consider that the US corporate tax structure, which I think is the second highest in the industrialized world, drives far more dollars offshore, never to return, than the redistribution of MY tax dollars to a bunch of farmers. I'm all for American agriculture - my dad grew up on a family farm - but gasohol from corn is not a winner and never will be without the dual props of obscene subsidies and tariffs on far more cost effective Brazilian ethanol derived from cane sugar,
It all comes down to three generalized rules of economics:
If you tax something, you get less of it.
If you subsidize something, you get more of it.
If you want to allocate resources optimally (from an economic efficiency POV), let the markets work.