IF you'd rather NOT be pinged FReepmail me.
IF you'd like to be added FReepmail me. Thanks.
*****************************************************************************************************************************************************
Posted on 12/29/2011 1:10:03 PM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
Details here and here: the short version is that the Senate back in June kicked off opposition to continued ethanol subsidies via a bipartisan amendment: it didn’t pass, but Congress has just let both the ethanol subsidy and a restrictive foreign tariff (on Brazilian sugar-cane ethanol) lapse. Given that the Iowa caucuses will be finished by the time Congress reconvenes – and given that the House of Representatives is currently chock-heavy with people who spit at the very phrase ‘ethanol subsidy’ – getting back either is going to be a problem for the domestic ethanol industry. Mind you, there are still mandates for using ethanol in place, but note again the ending of the tariff; I’m not a businessman, but effectively lowering the price of Brazilian ethanol by 54 cents/gallon while simultaneously effectively raising the price of domestic ethanol by 45 cents/gallon sounds to me like it would at least raise some intriguing alternatives.
More to the point, ending the subsidies on domestic ethanol production is frankly more ethical anyway. Far too much domestic ethanol is made from perfectly-good foodstock that could be better served, well, feeding people. The cycle was rather nasty, thanks largely to that subsidy; and, in fact, it’s one of the reasons why food prices have been rising lately.
In closing: it may or may not make long-term sense to include ethanol into our energy usage. After all, if you can burn something then by definition it’s an energy source. But we cannot adequately and empirically judge the usefulness of ethanol when its market value has been distorted by government interference. Removing the subsidies and tariffs – which is another way of saying ‘picking winners and losers’ – is a good first step towards coming to that judgment.
Gov. Perry HONESTLY tells callers, no subsidies on ethanol, oil and gas, wind, etc. CUT regulations! Let the market place decide. If states want to invest fine, but keep the Feds out of it.
Newt Gingrich tells farmers different:
Newt Gingrich supports federal ethanol subsidies. -- Giant ethanol maker among Newt Gingrich’s top campaign donors
“Iowa Farmer Today” Decision time draws near - December 29, 2011:
“The Iowa Corn Growers Association sent questionnaires to the Republicans involved in this year’s caucuses, then issued grades on how it judged those candidates as part of its Iowa Corn Caucus.
The Iowa Soybean Association (ISA) took a different approach, offering its members the chance to listen in on teleconferences with some of the candidates and ask questions.
“We call that our town-hall conference call,” explains Mark Jackson, ISA president-elect. “We want to give people the opportunity to hear the candidates talk about agricultural issues.”
The first of those calls came in early December with former Georgia congressman Newt Gingrich. More than 3,000 people listened in.
Texas Gov. Rick Perry was the subject of another call.
The report cards issued by the corn growers spotlighted the differences between some of the candidates.
For example, U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, earned a “D” from the group, and U.S. Rep. Michelle Bachmann, R-Minn., earned a “D+” while Gingrich earned an “A” and Rick Santorum earned an “A-.”
President Barack Obama earned a “B” as did former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney. Perry earned a “C-.” Herman Cain, who has since dropped out of the race, earned a “D.”
“That’s stirred a little controversy,” Jackson says of the corn caucus ratings. “And, that’s good.”
The caucuses are a longtime Iowa tradition. They first gained some notoriety in 1972, when the Democrats changed their candidate selection process to more emphasis on primaries and caucuses and less on the convention.
Jimmy Carter came to the state early before the 1976 election and used it as a springboard to snaring the Democratic nomination.
………….Most of the Republicans in the field have pledged to reduce the regulatory burden on business. Many have pledged to either lower taxes or not to raise taxes.
Several have claimed they would close various departments of the government.
A few have offered support for ethanol, biodiesel and wind energy, all of which have been rapidly growing segments of Iowa’s economy.
But, others have said they would eliminate all incentives for those types of energy, often arguing there should be no incentives at all, and government should remove itself from the process, an argument that raises the ire of many farm leaders.
Those farm leaders have said there is no such thing as a level playing field in the energy business and add the government long has supported the oil industry.”
FYI, I just heard that a judge shot down Perrys VA lawsuit.
Next hearing is a month away.
Bastards!
Perry Gets Virginia Ballot Court Date (asking other candidates to join suit)
Thanks!
Yes!!!
Ethanol bad / Butanol good - but neither requires subsidies
Same with bio or algea biodiesel
No subsidies
Thanks for the info.
Jan 13 is reasonable.
The radio report lead me to believe it had been delayed a month.
So what will be the impact on 10% ethanol gassoline at the pump?
GOOD!
It’s a waste of FOOD, in a world full of starving people!
It’s a waste of ENERGY, because it costs more to make than the petroleum equivalent.
It’s a joke on the environment, because with the reduced fuel economy, the pollutants per mile are equal to gas.
So, then Gingrich, Santorum, and Romney have all taken positions on the ethanol issue diametrically opposed to the Republican Party Platform.
Much better gas mileage.
I can only hope that it has the effect of eliminating ethanol of any percentage from gasoline I buy.
No real benefits from the standpoint of emissions; but decreased gasoline mileage for us drivers.
If the people gripe enough about the rise in gas prices because of more expensive ethanol. Otherwise, gas prices will just rise to levels much higher, giving Dems a reason to scream the usual about Republicans hating the poor.
None.
IF you'd rather NOT be pinged FReepmail me.
IF you'd like to be added FReepmail me. Thanks.
*****************************************************************************************************************************************************
DRILL BABY DRILL !!!
Perry came down hard on getting rid of the ridiculous EPA regs and other things.
These other candidates are copying him and trying to steal that idea away - most of whom have little understanding. Rick and Atty General Greg Abbott have battled the EPA a number of times.
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.