Dependence on biofuel produced from crops (like corn) could ultimately pose a problem re security of supply i.e. the ability to grow sufficient crop could be reduced by climate change itself.

Hence focus on alternatives such as geosequestration (coal), wind, solar, tidal, hot rocks etc. is vital.

Biofuel might have a place but weather/climate change poses a security problem.

Production of biofuel from less vulnerable sources might be an option eg. from phytoplankton, algae etc.

There are also numerous studies showing that ethanol and other biofuels are contributing to high food prices.

Where's the balance?

I am interested in news, not the opinions of journalists who simply have a forum.

Food prices are rising primarily because of rising fuel prices that add to the cost of transport and the high cost of chemical fertiliser production that is tied to the petro-chemical industry.

Add to this the loosening of food subsidies and the costs associated with drought, loss of water for irrigation, etc. and food prices rise.

The impact of bio-fuel production on food prices is probably much less than 5%.

However, this is a small price and worthwhile if it improves air pollution, secures the income of grain farmers and enables the recycling of nutrients back to the land from distillers grain as soil conditioners and stock feed.

Let's deal with the facts, not the biased opinions of the oil lobby.