The latter estimates federal support for ethanol to total between $5.5 billion and $7.3 billion each year, and the benefits to ADM which (according to the article) contols about 1/3 of the ethanol market.
The article suggests that the federal government could do more to fight greenhouse gases (GHG) if it used the money to buy carbon offsets. Of course, that's not the administration's goal in supporting ADM and ethanol, is it? "
http://plawiuk.blogspot.com/2007/01/biofuel-and-wheat-board.html
[Proofreader's note: this article was edited for spelling and typos on January 8, 2007]
Note: http://plawiuk.blogspot...

---
"When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change."
-Max Planck
---
Expect little from life and get more from it.
Your assuming the government went into power to do you and I some good. There is no profit in spending money on fighting greenhouse gas's. That is not what going to bio-fuel is about. As Eugine pointed out, it is no coincidence the dismissal of the wheat board and the requirement for bio-fuel happened together. He further pointed out at least one party who stands to gain by it. I didn't miss the part about the better use of the money. The government chose to ignore it. The have turned one accord aside to fight greenhouse gas's, to form their own profitable one. Unfortunatly, we will be paying for the profit.
---
Expect little from life and get more from it.
---
"When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change."
-Max Planck