Posted on 02/22/2018 12:10:43 PM PST by Rio
As part of his ongoing war against the ethanol industry, Senator Ted Cruz traveled to Philadelphia this week to meet with oil refinery workers who claim to be facing layoffs and financial ruin due to the federal mandated Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS).
The now-bankrupt refinery, Philadelphia Energy Solutions, has argued that the cause of its financial problems are renewable identification numbers, or RINs, federal credits that refineries must purchase if they are unable to blend ethanol with gasoline as federal law requires. Credit prices fluctuate and in the past year, have risen from a few cents to nearly $1.40 apiece.
Cruz describes RINs as a government license, and using the refinery’s narrative to further his plans to overhaul the ethanol industry and reform the RFS, Cruz states that requiring a business to “spend more than double [their] payroll to write a check not to buy anything, not to pay anybody, not to buy any supplies, but simply to purchase a government license […] is crushing.” Cruz, along with other RFS critics, say the RFS will be disastrous for the oil refining sector.
However, while Cruz cites RINs as being the cause of 1,100 working class jobs lost, the ethanol industry continues to push back. The Renewable Fuels Association, the industry’s leading trade group, claims that Philadelphia Energy Solutions “has fallaciously blamed the RFS and RINs for its recent decision to seek bankruptcy protection.” The association also provided research that it says shows RINs aren’t a serious concern for refineries.
Ethanol leaders claim they’re willing to speak further on the topic, but maintains that the Philadelphia refinery’s woes has nothing to do with their product, but rather “antiquated technology” and the new Dakota Access pipeline and the elimination of the oil export ban, both of which have cut off its supply of crude oil. Bob Dinneen, Renewable Fuels Association President, goes on to comment: “But it’s so much more expedient to blame ethanol.”
Back in Philadelphia, the refinery and the United Steelworkers, which represent its employees, called those claims “dishonest.”
This was the single issue on which he won the most respect from me. The whole thing is lunacy and he’s the only one that stood up to it.
Yes, Ted Cruz is the only politician who dares to question the government subsidies to biofuels.
I need some info. I’ve been told by several drivers delivering fuel to store locations that ethanol is added at the rack when the tanker is loaded. Drivers have cards for each customer that tells the computer controlling the blend by percentages and additives what goes into the tank.
Given how fast gasoline goes bad due to ethanol content, I can’t see refineries making a product with a limited shelf life. Better to ship gasoline to a fill point for tankers and add ethanol immediately before shipment to a store for sale to the public.
All additives of any kind are added at the rack. Different brands and grades may have different additives, but all brands’ raw gas comes out of the same pipeline.
Go Cruz!
Why has President Trump not buried the ethanol mandates already? There is no excuse for this waste of energy.
I had a work mate that used to be a chemist at the Anacortes refinery in Washington state. He told me that the trucks would fill up and then, based on their company brand, get the additive shot they needed. i.e. Chevron and mobile and Arco were all the same gasoline, but each got a different additive when the truck was filled.
Think of the addition of color to a base paint at the hardware store.
This was close to 20 years ago and before ethanol was common in gas.
How about taking the tax breaks away from oil companies, crickets.
Well,I guess I thought that ethanol was added at the delivery point. Is it or not? I know it doesn’t hold up well in storage. As far as I’m personally concerned,I think the whole ethanol industry came about as a result of government edicts & needs to be flushed permanently down the stool. Doesn’t make sense putting this crap in gasoline that costs more than the gasoline to make & then has to be subsidized by the taxpayer. Then you can add in the other problems it causes in certain types of equipment.
I can see the Anacortes refineries out my window as I am typing this and yes, that is how they do it. I’m lucky enough to have two stations within driving distance where I can buy ethanol-free gas. Costs a little more but my old weed-eater and leaf blower that leak oil like a sieve and no longer run remind me what that crap does to a motor.
What tax breaks are those, specifically?
“Doesn’t make sense putting this crap in gasoline that costs more than the gasoline to make & then has to be subsidized by the taxpayer.”
You answered your own question in the sentence. You just didn’t add the cost of mixing it in and the taxes on that. Don’t sell them short.
rwood
Ted Cruz opposes subsidies for everything.
Imagine that, Ted is from the #1 oil producing state and doesn’t like ETOH. I bet he likes the oil industry subsidies. Otherwise, I still like Ted.
I don’t care whether he’s in the pocket of “Big Oil” or not. (I would not believe that he is.) If he can kill any subsidy, for whatever reason, more power to him. If somebody from Big Solar or Big Wind wants to crusade for cutting subsidies to Big Oil, or the other way around, I’d be in favor of that too.
How bout social security and Medicare subsidies? Scientific Research subsidies?
I don’t play word games. You know what we’re talking about.
I’m not playing word games. This is exactly what you wrote. “If he can kill any subsidy, for whatever reason, more power to him.” Social security and Medicare are the biggest subsidies out there.
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.