Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: jnsun
The federal (DC) ethanol mandate IS about subsidizing the corn industry.

Ethanol can be produced from many other crops more efficiently than from corn.

The mandate only specifies the volume of ethanol to be included in the fuel supply; it does not mention what source is to be used.

The subsidy is paid as ethanol is blended with gasoline. It is paid regardless of the source of ethanol, included imported sources. (note, we are now an exporter of ethanol since we produce more than we use)

10 posted on 05/19/2011 5:55:52 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]


To: thackney

So we are now subsidizing other countries at 47.5 cents/gallon? And if we didn’t slap a 54 cent/gallon tariff on Brazilian ethanols we WOULD be an importer and save taxpayers money.

Bottom line: It costs 65% more energy to produce ethanol than the energy we derive from ethanol. If it wasn’t a subsidy program, why would we do it?


17 posted on 05/26/2011 5:50:47 PM PDT by Ken in Eastman (Those who ignore history are destined to vote Democrat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson