State Fights U.S. on Ethanol

Re “Farmers Fume as State Goes Against the Grain,” Aug. 20: California wants the cleanest-burning gasoline at the lowest possible price. The federal ethanol mandate would give us neither. Our scientific evidence and the U.S. EPA’s own blue-ribbon panel show that we can produce clean gas without ethanol.

Increased ethanol production will not wean Midwestern farms from subsidies. Washington pays 54 cents per gallon to subsidize ethanol, and then it recovers that money by deducting it from the states’ highway funds. If California is forced to buy unnecessary ethanol, our highway construction and maintenance programs could lose hundreds of millions of dollars each year. California motorists might face price spikes of up to 50 cents a gallon for gasoline with ethanol.

No one should assume that California is anti-ethanol. We want our local ethanol industry to grow and prosper. There will be a science-based need for 200 million gallons of ethanol each year (to fight L.A. wintertime carbon monoxide). That amount will absorb all the ethanol Californians can produce for years and should also make Midwestern farmers happy.

Winston H. Hickox

Secretary, Cal/EPA

Sacramento

*

The Davis administration has been talking about importing ethanol from Brazil if California is forced to use it. It sounds like the Davis administration feels it has done so well in getting the state government into the energy business that it now plans to also get us into the gasoline business. What would the state do with the ethanol it imported? Sell it at a big loss to the big oil companies that run the refineries? Gov. Gray Davis’ approach to this situation makes about as much sense as his approach to the energy situation.

Jack Bendar

Pacific Palisades

*

When deregulation was voted in, we received information in the mail from many electric providers. We read it all and decided that we would change to Enron. While we were paying an average of 3 cents a kilowatt-hour, many of our friends who stayed with San Diego Gas & Electric were paying considerably more. When the so-called energy shortage came, we did everything to help cut usage. Our bills stayed low and, last year at this time, we were even able to enjoy the use of air conditioning. With the low charge from Enron, our bills were still within reason.

However, due to the climate (mostly Gray) in California, Enron decided to pull out and notified us that we would be back with SDG&E.; We recently received our first statement, and the charges for a kilowatt-hour were from 6 cents to 8 cents. We do have a few rental units that we had switched to Enron and, by doing so, were able to keep from raising rents, as many other property owners had to do. Now that we are back with SDG&E;, we must consider rent increases. We have a hard time understanding why Gov. Davis criticized Enron as an expensive electric provider. We were paying a quarter to a third less per kilowatt-hour than we are now. As far as we’re concerned, deregulation worked great.

Lois J. Cox

San Diego