It is clear from the “King Corn” documentary screening last night that corn indeed reigns supreme in the United States. You can tell just from the sponsors of the screening — Stanford in Government, Stanford Dining, the Program in Ethics and Society and Students for a Sustainable Stanford — that corn has transformed from a barbeque side dish to an emerging alternative energy source and one of today’s most hotly contested political topics. Although the corn ethanol phenomenon has been propelled by environmental concerns and fear of foreign-oil dependency, the editorial board feels that corn ethanol is not a viable solution to the recent concerns over fossil fuel depletions.

Perhaps the most compelling argument for the use of corn ethanol is its viability as an environmentally friendly alternative energy source. Many studies have shown, however, that the greenhouse emissions released by corn ethanol are similar to those of gasoline, with the most generous approximations estimating only a 30 percent decrease in greenhouse gases. The process of making corn ethanol is also not very environmentally friendly, since fossil fuels are utilized heavily during the conversion of corn to fuel. Consumer Reports stated that the positive energy balance for ethanol lies between 23 and 40 percent. Additionally, growing corn depletes the soil even if sustainable farming methods such as crop rotation are used — some researchers argue that ethanol production from corn could deplete the soil within 30 years.

The desire to make our country less dependent on foreign oil is a legitimate and compelling concern. Unfortunately, corn ethanol will do little to solve this problem. First, the growth and production of the corn requires transporting seeds, making fertilizer, herbicide and insecticide, as well as operating tractors and other farming equipment — processes that all require fossil fuel. The conversion of corn into ethanol through industrial fermentation, chemical processing and distillation also uses large amounts of fossil fuels, not to mention the transportation of the materials via diesel trucks.

A 2008 farm bill that is currently working its way through Congress mandates the production of 15 billion gallons of ethanol annually, up from seven billion gallons. This mandate would absorb much of the $280 billion allotted to farm subsidies, and would hardly affect the 150 billion gallons of oil used in the U.S. annually.

Moreover, demand for biofuels is raising the price of crops. This may adversely affect food supplies, since dedicating more land to ethanol crops squeezes the amount of farmland used for food production. In 2007, the price of corn feed increased 20 percent and grocery prices increased five percent partly because, as “King Corn” showed last night, corn is in everything.

Farmers are an important part of the U.S. economy and voting population — especially in the recent Iowa caucus — and have managed to push ethanol through Capitol Hill. While corn-derived ethanol may be a short term solution to America’s energy problem, however, its long-term viability is almost nil.