Dear Editor:

At this time I would like to thank all the teachers of Richmond Hill High School who had no air conditioner, had pupils such as myself, and all classes grades 1st through 12th in the same building for teaching me to think for myself and question all untested theory. After reading your Wednesday, May 10 article on ethanol one must question if these two important guiding principles are even discussed in school today.

At the Thursday Rotary meeting Mr. D. Lamar DeLoach stated, "The reason why we should consider ethanol is the economic security."

The facts of corn ethanol are:

1. Ethanol requires more energy to product than the end product ethanol can produces, i.e. a net loss of energy.

2. Ethanol when factoring in production fuel is a greater polluter than fossil fuels.

3. With 25 percent of the present corn crop going for ethanol and with new laws in place the percentage will increase greatly, it is easy to understand why the cost of almost all food products that are increasing in cost at greater than inflation.

4. Starving people in third world countries and maybe here in America.

What part of "economic security" am I missing?

We all need to understand ethanol was a mistake; it is taking time, money, and effort from find a true alternative or renewable energy source while starving people in the process.

From the class of 1960, go Wildcats.

Richard Jones

Woodbine, Ga.