- Two men seriously hurt in crash near Fruitland (9/21/16)3
- Community helps Jackson family with two cases of muscular dystrophy (9/19/16)
- Perryville man arrested for alleged patronizing prostitution, harassment (9/23/16)6
- Eldorado Resorts to buy Isle of Capri Casinos (9/20/16)7
- Concealed-carry restrictions remain in Missouri despite new state law (9/18/16)22
- Video and evidence largely confirm trooper's claims in April traffic stop shooting (9/23/16)6
- Funeral procession of former Cape Girardeau police chief Henry H. Gerecke (9/22/16)17
- Cape man accused of attacking pregnant girlfriend (9/22/16)
- Poplar Bluff man accused of beating a grandmother to death with baseball bat (9/18/16)
- Cape man may lose eye after shovel beating, police say (9/25/16)2
Ethanol plants are bad investment
To the editor:I concur with Monty Keesee's concern about the pollution likely to occur from the proposed ethanol plants. The bright side is that the ethanol-plant investors will think twice before investing in more plants. Stock prices in plants that have gone public have dropped 40 to 60 percent. Investors are banking on increased corn acres, resulting in higher yields. This is not likely to happen, because:
1. Corn in lieu of spring wheat yields 50 bushels less.
2. Corn after corn yields 12 to 20 percent less than corn after beans.
3. Cotton Belt corn is 35 bushels less than Corn Belt corn.
4. Floods and wet-weather delays in planting this spring will result in lower yields or switching back to soybeans.
5. Government subsidies slated to expire in 2008 and 2009 will end profitability for ethanol, if not renewed.
6. In the past two years, the United States has not produced enough corn to meet market demands for beef, pork, poultry, milk, eggs and ethanol.
7. High corn prices and lack of subsidies will reduce profit to the extent that ethanol plants will inevitably close or be a bad investment.
JACK H. KNOWLAN Sr., Jackson