There is no sweet side to E85. It gets far worse mpg than gasoline and there was an article earlier this year in US News and World Report about the cost of corn for food already rising because of the pressures being put on supply due to the government's push for ethanal. Ethanal does not have the same energy potential as regular gasoline.
The corn lobby, unsurprisingly, is trying to make money off of the ethanol fad. Corn is NOT the best solution, but the lobbyists aren't really concerned about that (it's not their job). Corn is massively subsidized and so all the people competing to make ethanol (switch grass, willow, poplar, sugars, etc.) are trying to outcompete the price of a subsidized industry.
The corn lobby is really detrimental to America, actually. And, you're quite right in stating that making food compete with fuel is kinda silly.
When we compare ethanol to gasoline, there are some good indicators to looks at: carbon footprint, cost, pollution, etc. I don't think that actual volume (or energy density) really matters, to be honest. When I'm going to be getting ethanol, I'm going to be calculating its benefit based on $/km travelled. If I can drive 100km for less money on ethanol than on gasoline, I'm going to consider it a success. After that, I want it to be a lower carbon footprint than gasoline (which will require environmentally friendly growth and harvesting techniques)
Skadistic: Wow! I don't think it's really fair to poo-poo the electric, to be honest. I mean, the bike was just mishandled on a power test, which is not really a poor showing on the bike's part. Comparing it to a power-drill was a good analogy...
Why do you think the Ethanol helped get the viper going so fast? I don't know enough about cars to guess what its main benefits would have been.