I agree about subsidys. Any form of alternative fuel not capable of making it on it’s own merit is bad economics.
Most of the subsidys for ethanol production are only in loans and loan guarantees. Our state Missouri has a loan program for ethanol production startups. Some would call that a subsidy I suppose. Corn growers get no subsidys because the price is above parity (cost of production), thanks to ethanol.
Our US farm program (very deceptive description) does have a few subsidys for certain crops, product development and genetic studys. but the biggest subsidy in the USDA is known as food stamps and US surplus commodities provided for little or no cost for school lunches.
there is also a CRP (conservation reserve program) that pays farms to contract for idle ground. The ground has to be mowed once a year. supposedly it has benefits to wildlife conservation. Even with that land out of production, farms continue to break production records.
I am all for oil and coal. Oil shale. coal gas. There is no reason private enterprise will not produce those products for consumers. But since the government grants the permission slip to develop coal power plants, nuclear power, and oil and gas drilling they ultimately control the supply of energy. America could have been nearly energy self sufficient 30 years ago if not for environmental laws and frivolous lawsuits by the Sierra Club and their ilks, blocking oil drilling and exploration in ANWR, costal California, florida, and elsewhere.
We are doomed to fail in energy self sufficiency because the government’s energy plan reaches no further ahead than an election cycle. And since government holds the permission slip for development, we have no plan other than Ethanol. And since 10% ethanol based fuel has powered my vehicles over a half million miles in the last 30 years, and I have seen how ethanol has helped our local economy, it’s far better than the nothing else plan.
Our objection is to the nothing else plan. Missouri is a classic case of where there are shallow deposits, coming up from deeper deposits across the river, whose production needs to be explored more effectively but because its politicians such as Kit Bond are obsessed with ethanol, have not been. Our whole point about ethanol is that it has blinded politicians to what could and should be done and while it has promoted certain local economies it has been at the expense of achieving energy independence. By the way tax breaks are subsidies. I can tell you from hard experience that in almost every state you cannot under present law achieve tax breaks for better gasoline equivalent to those for ethanol biodiesel and the like and that is certainly true for the feds.