I’m going to disagree, NT, because national security IS a conservative position.
We specifically give contracts to the air industry, the ship industry, the auto industry, the tech industry, etc. to design and develop wartime ships, planes, vehicles, tanks, etc.
To put a simple tax break into place to encourage American independence is a great trade-off in my book. And it’s pennies compared to those other industries.
I believe the mandate’s only good result is that it’s forcing engine producers to change the type of plastics in use so they are compatible with other fuel types.
My understanding is that one of the real directions for clean coal is methanol. With Trump’s support for all forms of energy, and his huge support for coal, and our hundreds of years proven reserves of coal, I know where this is going.
>> national security IS a conservative position
Agreed, but we have no shortage of petroleum feedstocks or refining capacity to justify ethanol mandates. The petroleum industry of 2015 is nothing like the petroleum industry of 1974.
North America can be “beyond” energy independent — we could EXPORT petroleum — if the FedGov would just get the hell out of the way.
Anyway, biofuels do not play much of a role as fuel for weaponry. The only reason the military is playing around with them is (again) to satisfy the earth worshippers.