Posted by Editors in
International Economics, US Domestic and Cultural Issues on Wednesday, October 4. 2006
Due to pressure from Midwest farmers and agribusinesses, the United States has imposed a 54-cents-a-gallon tariff to prevent Americans from importing sugar ethanol from Brazil, writes Thomas Friedman in the NY Times (subscribers only):
Yes, you read all this right. We tax imported sugar ethanol, which could finance our poor friends, but we don't tax imported crude oil, which definitely finances our rich enemies. We'd rather power anti-Americans with our energy purchases than promote antipoverty.
However, he also mentions that the Brazilian government is considering the expansion of the ethanol industry, which "could destroy the cerrado, the Brazilian savannah, another incredibly species-rich area" like the Amazon. "No wonder environmental activists are holding a conference in Germany this fall about the impact of biofuels. I could see some groups one day calling for an ethanol boycott - a la genetically modified foods - if they feel biofuels are raping the environment." Friedman, however, thinks ethanol can be promoted and the environment protected at the same time, if all involved parties sit down early.
Welcome! You are reading the ATLANTIC REVIEW -- a Press Digest on Transatlantic Relations combined with commentary and analysis by three young professionals from Germany, the Netherlands and the United States. More about us.
The horizontal menu bar at the top helps to navigate this site.
Subscribe to one of our RSS-Feeds or to our newsletter, which is emailed twice per month.
Only registered users may post comments here. Get your own account
here and then
log into this blog. Your browser must support cookies.
The author does not allow comments to this entry