Posted on 01/21/2016 2:17:48 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
One of the most destructive environmental subsidies in the United States has found an enthusiastic supporter in Donald Trump.
"The EPA should ensure that biofuel ... blend levels match the statutory level set by Congress," he said yesterday in Iowa, adding that he was "there with you 100 percent" on continuing federal support for ethanol. "You're going to get a really fair shake from me."
The ethanol lobby has rigorously courted Trump since April, arranging to speak at least weekly, including at least three in-person meetings, in addition to an ethanol-plant tour, the Wall Street Journal reports.
Trump's support for ethanol may win him votes in Iowa, but federal support for ethanol is a bum deal for Americans.
Under the 2007 Independence and Security Act, Congress mandated that the United States use 36 billion gallons of biofuels, including corn ethanol and cellulosic biofuel, by 2022.
And the federal government not only requires the use of ethanol; it also subsides it. Tax credits between 1978 and 2012 cost the Treasury as much as $40 billion. Moreover, numerous other federal programs, spanning multiple agencies, allot billions of dollars to ethanol in the form of grants, loan guarantees, tax credits, and other subsidies.
Taxpayers suffer in other ways, too. Vehicles can drive fewer miles per gallon using ethanol blends than they would with pure gasoline. So Americans end up spending an extra $10 billion per year for fuel, the Institute for Energy Research estimates.
Ethanol also guzzles 40 percent of the U.S. corn crop, and the resulting scarcity drives up the price of food. This year alone, the Congressional Budget Office estimated, American consumers will spend $3.5 billion more on groceries because of the ethanol mandate.
Rising prices of corn feed have even put some small feedlots and ranches out of business. And as grocery prices increase, so does federal spending on programs like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.
In a further hallmark of terrible policy, it's probably not even possible for Americans to meet the ambitious ethanol goals Congress and the bureaucrats at the EPA have envisioned.
Ethanol-intensive fuel blends can wreak havoc on car, lawnmower, and boat engines. In fact, many vehicle manufacturers will no longer offer warranties when ethanol comprises 10 percent or more of fuel; engine erosion simply becomes too common.
So, we can't really increase the total amount of ethanol mixed into our gasoline much more, but - especially as vehicles become more fuel efficient - Americans aren't consuming enough gasoline to meet the Renewable Fuel Standards with a 10 percent ethanol blend. The EPA acknowledged this inconvenient mismatch last spring, setting three-year ethanol-use requirements at 3.75 billion gallons below the legal minimums.
Ethanol's green benefit is also far from certain, explaining why even many within the environmentalist Left question - or outright oppose - the federal government's support.
It takes about 29 percent more energy to refine a gallon of ethanol than gasoline, and that process is often fueled by dirty sources like coal. Factor in the emissions generated during this production process, and ethanol sometimes comes in less green than old-fashioned gasoline. On top of that, burning ethanol also emits higher quantities of the chemical compounds that produce smog.
Then again, perhaps it's not surprising that Trump likes federal support of ethanol. After all, the real-estate mogul's business model has historically hinged on using tax abatements and other subsidies to make his building projects profitable.
(An example: As we reported in August, Trump Tower - which features a Gucci store Trump claimed was "worth more money than Romney" - has received a $163.775 million tax break from the city of New York.)
Many of Trump's constituents have rejected the so-called Republican establishment because of its corrupt preferential treatment for Wall Street and Big Business. But Trump's support for ethanol belies his populist Main Street rhetoric. In reality, he's just another rich, East Coast politician who would prop up special interests at the expense of the taxpayer.
-Jillian Kay Melchior writes for National Review as a Thomas L. Rhodes Fellow for the Franklin Center. She is also a senior fellow at the Independent Women's Forum and the Tony Blankley Fellow at the Steamboat Institute.
Ya, that was interesting (I looked too). 10 years ago we didn’t get much. Now we get a lot more, I don’t know why and that surprised me.
My info was out of date - memory... The last time I checked was likely before Obama took office...
After more looking I must be confused... I’m really tired... I’m going to bed...
what we need is to not mess with something that isn’t broken. But thanks for admitting that you’re perfectly willing to tamper with the stability of America’s food supply just to prove that Ted Cruz supporters are more conservative than Donald Trump supporters.
“” Cite an industry not supported by government. “”
Not much love for the oil and gas industry, hell we’ve been demonized. We’re the ones who brought down the high gas prices in-spite of government interference and now we suffer from doing too good of a job. Millions of people have been hurt, 39 oil producing states are seeing less severance tax revenue which means everybody will soon see a tax increase to offset the lose. People invested in 401’s are taking a big hit. I wonder if people would rather walk to the grocery store or drive? Maybe those of us in the oil and gas business in the US just need to take a one month vacation. Shut the wells in, turn the lights off and watch oil go over 200 dollars a barrel within a month. There’s about 300 thousand stripper wells across the US that are borderline getting shut in as we speak, many have already been shut in.
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 was introduced into Congress by a Republican representative. It passed by overwhelming majority votes in both the house and senate, both of which were controlled by the Republican Party. It became law when it was signed by the Republican President Bush.
My sad realization is that there really is not enough of us to stick together with. I have come to accept the fact that our base yearns for the good old days of FDR, not Reagan as I thought. My nightmare that I feared has arrived, a candidate who is culturally conservative, but economically liberal. We used to hear of the candidate who would state they were socially liberal, and fiscally conservative, they were always losers. I used to say to myself that the opposite was dangerous, that type of candidate could run the table. Unfortunately my fears are coming true.
In some areas. In mine it takes about 150 mile drive to find. {Houston area}
We have the joy of also being an EPA Reformulated Gasoline required area.
The problem is the blend mandate forces companies to price Non-ethanol gasoline high enough to keep the purchases of ethanol mixed gasoline sufficient. They buyer of non-ethanol gasoline is forced to subsidize the other purchases.
“”The Energy Policy Act of 2005 was introduced into Congress by a Republican representative. It passed by overwhelming majority votes in both the house and senate, both of which were controlled by the Republican Party. It became law when it was signed by the Republican President Bush.””
Well that bought a bunch of votes.
The Donald has lost me here. Too many lawnmower etc engines rebuilt in my neighborhood because of this crap and don't even ask about the emergency landings ( yes sometimes aircraft use auto fuel ) that I know about because of this.
Get rid of Ethanol and all the boutique blends of gasoline, we need a common fungible standard.
Unless Ted can pull a rabbit out of his hat what the h@ll do I do now, stay home is in 16' is looking like an option, the Donald is becoming an also in the category of the evil of 2 lessers, Putin that can build a high-rise.
I can’t say that it alone brought us democrat control of Congress and the Kenyan Usurper. I can say that it is symptomatic of the general failure of the Republicans to govern properly 2000-2006 ... and that WAS the cause of the present governmental disaster that is the 0bama regime.
I’ve read many of your posts on this thread. They read like a left-wing dammocrap’s posts - or maybe those of a socialist. Go back to DU. Or CPUSA, as the case may be.
So the lesser of two evils got us that...
I wonder if Trump has heard of EROI (Energy Return on Investment)?
There are conflicting reports on whether ethanol from corn provides a net positive energy balance after accounting for the energy required to produce it (tractor fuel, fertilizer, distilling). From what I’ve heard, the return is low—whether it’s slightly positive or negative is under dispute.
If I were President, or even a candidate, I’d say as much, and commission a study by impartial people to get at the truth. Of course, finding competent people who are truly impartial, and then convincing everyone that they were would be difficult.
Trump supporters are nuts. Today we see them swallowing the ethanol flip flop with ease.
A social scientist with the University of Massachusetts conducted a study last week designed to identify trends among the supporters of the leading political candidates for the 2016 race. With respect to Trump’s supporters in particular, the study found that the main statistical variable that could be used to predict whether someone was a Trump supporter was not race, age, religion, income, or education. It is, rather, an impulse towards authoritarianism.
http://www.redstate.com/2016/01/17/study-proves-trumps-supporters-wont-leave-matter/
Yes. I have to reread my typing several times as most of us are not trained typists.
That’s 2009 and, while most of us knew it, there wasn’t a sure sign of how bad Obama was actually going to be. Kind of a reverse of Obama getting the Nobel Prize before actually doing anything - if you thought that was crap, then hitting at trump for that early on comment is also crap.
The place I saw it said squirrel hair
So you haven’t heard that Cruz told them he’d give them a 5 year Waiver! How Obamaish of Cruz!
What's the cut-off date (going back) for your "I can excuse anything Trump did" position.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.