From The New York Times:

Bush Calls for Increase in Renewable Fuels

By EDMUND L. ANDREWS and FELICITY BARRINGER

WASHINGTON, Jan. 23 — President Bush, vowing to reduce the nation’s thirst for foreign oil, called tonight for a huge government-mandated increase in renewable fuels — mainly ethanol — and tougher mileage standards for cars and light trucks...

...Many supporters of ethanol and other renewable fuels praised Mr. Bush proposals. The Union of Concerned Scientists estimated that the alternative fuels plan could save 550,000 barrels of oil per day in 2017, while higher fuel efficiency standards could reduce emissions equivalent to “taking 14 million of today’s cars and trucks off the road.”

But many cautioned that the goals would be difficult to attain, might do little to reduce greenhouse gases and could lead to higher food prices as farmers cater to energy demand rather than food production.

Mr. Bush called for increasing the federal requirement for annual production of alternative fuels to 35 billion gallons a year. That would almost quintuple the current mandate of producing 7.5 billion gallons of ethanol by 2012. Spurred by tax breaks and soaring oil prices, ethanol production has climbed rapidly and is expected to hit 6 billion gallons this year.

But energy analysts say that corn-based ethanol, which accounts for virtually all of today’s production, will not be able to produce more than about half as much alternative fuel as Mr. Bush envisions by 2017.

The most popular alternative to corn is “cellulosic ethanol,” produced from plants like switchgrass and even plant refuse. But cellulosic ethanol has yet to be produced in commercial quantities at anything approaching a competitive price.

“There is really no plan here except to take the ethanol industry through the roof,” said Ken Cook, president of the Environmental Working Group, who has been a longtime supporter of alternative fuels but now worries about disruptions from huge increases in ethanol production.

“There is not much thought given to the impact it will have on land, wildlife, water pollution, the food supply, trade or anything else,” Mr. Cook said. “It’s unfortunate, because biofuels deserve better than that.”

But Mr. Bush also laced his proposals with numerous “safety valves” that could easily postpone the attainment of his goals.