Stories on Tuesday by the Associated Press detail the environmental damage of the corn-based renewable fuel ethanol.

Few fuel sources can claim to be the answer to America’s quest for an energy source. Even nuclear energy, with its ultra-low fossil fuel footprint, has serious drawbacks. Hydro destroys wildlife habitat and sometimes requires entire towns to move. Wind energy is intermittent, and solar energy, while getting better, lacks the capacity the world seeks. And it’s a universally accepted fact that coal and oil have had much more serious environmental damage than ethanol, wind, nuclear and solar combined, and let’s not forget the human toll from oil-related wars.

Clearly, the green solution to energy problems remains out there. There must be some leeway, some slack, for growing pains.

Ethanol is on the right track. University studies show it releases fewer greenhouse gases than the conventional means of making gasoline. And those studies are describing the entire production life cycle, not merely what comes out of the exhaust pipes.

What’s more, much of the gasoline used in the Midwest comes from the Alberta Tar Sands. Gasoline from oil sands produces three times as many greenhouse gases than conventional oil. It makes ethanol look far cleaner than gasoline, by comparison — a comparison the AP failed to make.

The fact is, one of the best aspects of ethanol is it is a domestic source of energy — also an aspect the AP didn’t delve into. Wouldn’t American consumers rather have their fuel dollars going to Midwestern farmers than to royal families and dictators in the Middle East?

Moreover, ethanol has gone a long way toward improving the economy of rural America. Moribund for decades, small towns and ag-dependent regional centers were shrinking as farm efficiency became the American food goal. Farmers had to choose between specializing or selling their family farm. On-farm income declined and more families took off-farm jobs. Youth migrated out of small towns to colleges, then off to the major cities for work. We recall times in the 1990s when commodity prices matched levels of the 1950s. And who can forget the farm crisis of the 1980s? Rural Americans were beginning to wonder if anyone in Washington — be they Republican or Democrat — really cared about the rural vote except during hollow promises made leading up to the Iowa caucuses.

Increased corn prices, in part because of ethanol, hasn’t been the only factor to turn around the rural economy, but it is one of the factors. Land prices sure have climbed. The farm economy is functioning. Jobs are being created, and that’s good for America.

It is natural that when an industry does well, there will be expansion that has some environmental drawbacks, whether it is cellphones, office paper, big-box retailers or suburban living. There will be more land in production as a result of changes in agricultural markets and machinery. But hasn’t that been happening since pioneer farmers began settling America’s breadbasket? Be it John Deere’s plow, the latest farm bill or high corn prices, farmers respond.

Ethanol also is driving research and innovation, right here in the Midwest. The industry is bent on improving and becoming more green as it grows. And that includes addressing environmental issues the AP detailed.

Why would importing foreign oil be better?