Public debates are usually viewed as a war, with one side winning and one losing. And debates are often seen as a negative, with each side using nasty exaggerations and the public unable to decipher the truth.

But vigorous public discussions are the key to an informed democracy and good decision making.

That’s why the storms whipping up around the benefits or folly of ethanol production should be viewed as a healthy and necessary public debate.

Ethanol industry leaders say they feel under siege by criticisms that corn-based ethanol is driving up the cost of food, endangering the water supply and the environment, not cost effective and not making much of a dent in reducing fossil fuel consumption.

But the questions are legitimate and the industry should be willing to answer the charges.

Ethanol has long been the darling of elected officials seeking answers to importing oil. Farm-state politicians, especially, have seen ethanol as nothing but a win as it has been a boon to the agriculture economy and an alternative to fossil fuel.

But a growing chorus of critics raise troubling questions.

They argue the money, natural resources and energy put into making ethanol makes it much less of a bargain than claimed.

They worry about the tremendous amounts of water being pumped out of the ground for each ethanol plant and they are concerned about the pollution and erosion that increases as more acres of corn are planted.

The industry is fighting back with well-funded public relations campaigns. They have their job cut out for them. Ethanol has long had a free ride when it came to public scrutiny. But there are legitimate and serious issues about the ethanol boon.

The industry once needed extensive government subsidies to survive but has recently seen an explosion in growth and financial rewards.

If continued growth in the ethanol industry is good for the country, economically and environmentally, industry leaders should have no problem providing the proof. If it is not, then the public and political leaders need to know.

The answers affect decisions about everything from oil imports and energy conservation to taxpayer subsidies to agriculture and environmental laws.

So let the debate begin. It’s good, old-fashioned democracy at work.

(From The Free Press, Mankato, Minn.)