Ideology leads to inanity

There are plenty of problems with ethanol, from its relatively low energy balance to the use of corn - a high-intensity crop - to produce it. But whether or not ethanol is the dream fuel, no amount of wishing will make oil shale a better option. There are so many ways to dismantle this argument, but I'll just do one.

In the first section, Mr. Feulner of the Heritage Foundation notes that ethanol is a poor choice because of it's refining challenges:

For one thing, it's expensive to refine ethanol (emphasis mine)

But after he gushes about the availability of oil shale and its potential to supply all of US oil needs by 2020, Feulner admits:

...there's a reason the U.S. economy doesn't already run on oil shale: It's difficult to collect and refine. (emphasis mine)

So let's check the scorecard on oil shale, which the RAND Foundation says can't be developed unless oil prices top $70-95/barrel:

• Gallons of fuel produced last year: (Ethanol - 4 billion; Oil from shale - 0)
• Carbon reductions over gasoline: (Ethanol 5-10%; Oil from shale - 0)
• Renewable: (Ethanol - yes; oil shale - no)

Sounds like a real winner...