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

Skip to comments.

Oh, by the way, ethanol subsidies are dead.
Red State ^ | December 29, 2011 | Moe Lane

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.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; Politics
KEYWORDS: energy; ethanol; iowacaucus; renewables
Presidential Candidate [Perry] Holds Agriculture Conference Call

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

1 posted on 12/29/2011 1:10:11 PM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All; shield; normy; hocndoc; Conservativegreatgrandma
GUESS who has been HONEST with the farmers?

“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.”

2 posted on 12/29/2011 1:12:30 PM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

FYI, I just heard that a judge shot down Perrys VA lawsuit.
Next hearing is a month away.

Bastards!


3 posted on 12/29/2011 1:16:47 PM PST by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Related...

http://www.exposingtheleft.blogspot.com/2011/12/congress-ends-corn-ethanol-subsidy.html


4 posted on 12/29/2011 1:21:08 PM PST by traderrob6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mylife
Actually, the VA Court proceedings might prove to be interesting.

Perry Gets Virginia Ballot Court Date (asking other candidates to join suit)

5 posted on 12/29/2011 1:21:21 PM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: traderrob6

Thanks!


6 posted on 12/29/2011 1:22:25 PM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Yes!!!

Ethanol bad / Butanol good - but neither requires subsidies
Same with bio or algea biodiesel

No subsidies


7 posted on 12/29/2011 1:23:03 PM PST by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Thanks for the info.
Jan 13 is reasonable.
The radio report lead me to believe it had been delayed a month.


8 posted on 12/29/2011 1:24:17 PM PST by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

So what will be the impact on 10% ethanol gassoline at the pump?


9 posted on 12/29/2011 1:27:59 PM PST by dblshot (Insanity: electing the same people over and over and expecting different results.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

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.


10 posted on 12/29/2011 1:28:54 PM PST by G Larry ("I dream of a day when a man is judged by the content of his Character.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife; shield; normy; hocndoc; Conservativegreatgrandma

So, then Gingrich, Santorum, and Romney have all taken positions on the ethanol issue diametrically opposed to the Republican Party Platform.


11 posted on 12/29/2011 1:33:45 PM PST by ngat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: dblshot

Much better gas mileage.


12 posted on 12/29/2011 1:59:27 PM PST by normy (Don't take it personally, just take it seriously.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: dblshot

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.


13 posted on 12/29/2011 2:02:25 PM PST by Ole Okie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: normy

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.


14 posted on 12/29/2011 2:02:25 PM PST by runninglips (Republicans = 99 lb weaklings of politics. ProgressiveRepublicansInConservativeCostume)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: dblshot

None.


15 posted on 12/29/2011 2:16:28 PM PST by NVDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife; jonrick46; deepbluesea; TexMom7; potlatch; SunkenCiv; wolfcreek; BuckeyeTexan; ...
Perry Ping....

IF you'd rather NOT be pinged FReepmail me.

IF you'd like to be added FReepmail me. Thanks.

*****************************************************************************************************************************************************


16 posted on 12/29/2011 2:23:18 PM PST by shield (Rev 2:9 Woe unto those who say they are Judahites and are not, but are of the syna GOG ue of Satan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
No Food For Fuel - Bump!

DRILL BABY DRILL !!!

17 posted on 12/29/2011 2:26:46 PM PST by TexasCajun (Fast & Furious , Solyndra & Light Squared would be enough to impeach any White President !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mylife; Cincinatus' Wife
U.S. District Court in Virginia Expedites Rick Perry’s Ballot Access Lawsuit
18 posted on 12/29/2011 2:41:09 PM PST by smoothsailing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
Ethanol isn't a big deal this year here in Iowa. I was at Perry's event yesterday and farmers are much more worried about EPA regulations and other government regulations.

Perry came down hard on getting rid of the ridiculous EPA regs and other things.

19 posted on 12/29/2011 2:45:20 PM PST by HereInTheHeartland (I love how the FR spellchecker doesn't recognize the word "Obama")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: HereInTheHeartland
Rick Perry speaks ill of the EPA because of first hand experience in a top energy producing state, sorta like ol' Sarah Palin and Alaska.

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.

20 posted on 12/29/2011 3:05:12 PM PST by mikhailovich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: dblshot
So what will be the impact on 10% ethanol gassoline at the pump?

It will be interesting to watch.

If Congress does nothing about the ethanol requirement, then I'd speculate that:

1. Brazilian imports of ethanol will increase.

2. A lot of American ethanol producers will go bankrupt.

3. The corn crop will return to food production causing skyrocketing prices to gradually fall back to earth.

All in all, a net plus for consumers.

21 posted on 12/29/2011 3:08:42 PM PST by BfloGuy (The final outcome of the credit expansion is general impoverishment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: BfloGuy

-——The corn crop will return to food production -——

actually, the farmers will make less money because theywill grow less corn

impact on food is minimal


22 posted on 12/29/2011 3:13:32 PM PST by bert (K.E. N.P. +12 ..... Crucifixion is coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: mikhailovich
Yep, Perry has been there and seen it.

He mentioned he was at John Deere dealer the day before.
New EPA reqs to reduce sulfur will add $20,000 to the cost of some farm equipment for an extremely small amount of pollution reduction.

This kind of regulation is part of what is strangling an economic recovery. Ask any of us who work in the financial industry; same thing. The regulations we have to work around; do nothing to help consumers or make safer financial products.
They just add costs and frustrations to consumers.

23 posted on 12/29/2011 3:13:51 PM PST by HereInTheHeartland (I love how the FR spellchecker doesn't recognize the word "Obama")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: HereInTheHeartland
Perry came down hard on getting rid of the ridiculous EPA regs and other things.

The problem is they just want to get rid of the regs. The EPA will still be there, ready to write more regs as soon as they think they can get away with it.

We need to quit poking at the symptoms and go stomp on the problem.

24 posted on 12/29/2011 3:21:54 PM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh, bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

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.”

• natural gas - 25 cents per megawatt hour of electricity produced
• Coal - 44 cents per megawatt hour
• Nuclear $1.59 per megawatt hour
• Wind Energy $23.37 per megawatt hour
• Solar Energy $24.34 per megawatt hour
• Biofuels $1.78 per gal

These numbers do not include the additional subsidies we taxpayers have been compelled to pay for wind, solar and biofuels through the stimulus plan

Oil was not reported in these numbers since oil is hardly a factor in electricity production. However, oil benefits from a variety of tax subsidies for dry well expenses and royalty holidays dating from the $10-a-barrel oil days of the late 1990s, which the administration promises to rescind.


25 posted on 12/29/2011 3:22:36 PM PST by Recon Dad (Gas & Petroleum Junkie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: dblshot

At the most it would result in a 4.5¢ per gallon increase. But since it also reduces import restrictions, the likely case would be less. Plus market forces would also keep it less than that. The raw cost of the fuel is only part of the cost, production costs (refining), transportation (pipeline & trucking), taxes, and wholesaler and retailer profit margins also factor in.


26 posted on 12/29/2011 3:29:09 PM PST by RDasher ("El Nino is climate, La Nina is weather")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
The Midwest distillers may have to start selling cheap whiskey instead of expensive fuel. How's a moon shiner to make a living these days???
27 posted on 12/29/2011 3:44:44 PM PST by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Is the gasoline mandate going away as well?


28 posted on 12/29/2011 4:07:49 PM PST by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bert

actually, the farmers will make less money because theywill grow less corn

impact on food is minimal


So much corn production has been used in producing ethanol in recent years that the costs of beef and pork products has risen significantly because the cost of the animal feed has gone up. As a result, like me, many others no longer eat so much meat as we previously did.


29 posted on 12/29/2011 9:30:36 PM PST by octex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD

Perry says all subsidies should go — along with cutting onerous regulations.

Please listen to Rick Perry’s conference call in Link #1.


30 posted on 12/29/2011 11:02:44 PM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: octex

You fail to consider time and the perceived lag in production. The prices did rise in response to demand but in response the farmers produced more. This year, there will probably be record production in spite of the floods last spring. The production increase will mitigate the price rise earlier.

The increased production is not sustainable if ethanol subsidies are ended. Thus, farmers lose and land will produce something else or go fallow


31 posted on 12/30/2011 5:31:08 AM PST by bert (K.E. N.P. +12 ..... Crucifixion is coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Just one more reason why the nominee should be chosen by convention and the primaries and caucuses relegated to what they really are: circus sideshows that you attend for amusement only.

Case in point is the focus of Iowa farmers on keeping their own unfair, uneconomic, undeserved subsidies - most of the rest of the country suffers for these subsidies and allowing Iowa farmers to decide for the rest of us who the nominee is going to be essentially means that the favored nominee is going to be representative only of Iowa, not most of the rest of the country.

What a crying shame.


32 posted on 12/30/2011 6:38:28 AM PST by Oceander (TINSTAAFL - Mother Nature Abhors a Free Lunch almost as much as She Abhors a Vacuum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

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.

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