Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Another Made Up Mandate on Energy that Doesn't Exist ^

Posted on 02/03/2013 8:18:41 AM PST by Kaslin

Requiring the citizens of the kingdom to purchase something that doesn’t exist, and then fining them for not doing it sounds more like the behavior of a tinhorn dictator than the actions of a global superpower—but then, maybe the “superpower” status has led the US government to believe that it can “let the wish be father to the thought.”

Perhaps Congress, the authors of the Clean Air Act, and, more specifically, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)—and even biofuel lobbyists—have attended too many motivational seminars in which they were taught: “If you can dream it, then you can achieve it.”

The dream to “achieve” is cellulosic biofuel or ethanol—which has an admirable goal of producing a renewable transportation fuel without impacting the world’s food supply. Different from corn- or sugar-based ethanol—which is technologically achievable (with questionable benefits)—cellulosic ethanol is made from wood chips, switchgrass, and agricultural waste, such as corn cobs.

The problem is the dream doesn’t match reality.

Through the Clean Air Act, the EPA can mandate a set volume of cellulosic biofuels that refiners must blend into gasoline based on “the projected volume available.” In 2007, the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) established annual renewable fuel volume targets. The “targets” increase each year to reach 36 billion gallons by 2022. The EISA’s original cellulosic biofuel expectation for 2013 was 1 billion gallons.

The targets gave birth to a new cellulosic ethanol industry. Thanks to the government mandates, start-ups such as Range Fuels and Cello Energy were born. They cranked out press releases touting a potential for millions of gallons of the biofuel. Based on optimistic projections aimed at attracting investors, the EPA set its targets.

In 2006, President Bush pledged government funding for the nascent industry—declaring that cellulosic ethanol would be “practical and competitive within six years.” In March 2007, Range Fuels received a $76 million grant from the Department of Energy and another $80 million from the Obama administration in 2009. According to the Wall Street Journal, in May 2009, “Range's former CEO, Mitch Mandich, explained that the problem was that nobody had figured out how to produce cellulosic ethanol in commercial quantities.” Despite the approximately $300 million in a combination of private, state, and federal funding, Range Fuels never produced cellulosic ethanol. The company filed for bankruptcy in December 2011. Cello Energy filed Bankruptcy in October 2010.

TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Government
More in the link
1 posted on 02/03/2013 8:18:43 AM PST by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I remember the Mexican scam that damaged a lot of cars.

2 posted on 02/03/2013 8:22:42 AM PST by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote; then find me a real conservative to vote for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

There might be a ton more at the link, but when these boomers go bust on the public dime, I have issues. Giving
away money to ostensibly turn a sows ear into a silk purse
for a mythical dream is just more insanity driving us over
the cliff.

3 posted on 02/03/2013 8:36:29 AM PST by wita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

More Obozo Unicorn Farts.

4 posted on 02/03/2013 8:46:06 AM PST by Texas Fossil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

“...which has an admirable goal of producing a renewable transportation fuel without impacting the world’s food supply”

All of this magic grass and corn cobbs is grown in the same area as our food supply. Even if it worked, the need for large amounts of water to ‘refine’ corn cobbs into a mash competes with our food supply’s need for water.

5 posted on 02/03/2013 8:48:21 AM PST by lacrew (Mr. Soetoro, we regret to inform you that your race card is over the credit limit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lacrew
Even if it worked, the need for large amounts of water...

Not to mention the acreage. What if the government decides they need your farm for switch grass production? Eminent domain? For the common good? And you can count Monsanto to genetically modify the grass so that they can patent it and collect royalties.

6 posted on 02/03/2013 9:03:18 AM PST by tbpiper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: wita

This is not so very different than Obama’s plan for sub-bituminous coal, which he is promoting. Obama has a two sided plan for coal, first he wants to kill off all the bituminous coal mining, which is mostly on private land in the eastern half of the country.

Second, Obama wants to promote, subsidize and facilitate the mining and transport of sub-bituminous coal, which is mined in the western half of the country on federal land, or federally leased land owned by the Indian tribes, effectively nationalizing a segment of the coal industry.

The sub-bituminous coal is of a much lower grade than bituminous coal and is mostly used in smelters and cement factories in foreign countries. The sub-bituminous coal is in fact of such low quality that it only sells for $12.35 a ton, and that is a good price. At times the price is so low that it doesn’t pay to bring it up out of the ground. Sub-bituminous coal was de-classified as coal in 1992 for the express purpose of freeing it from EPA coal mining regulations to make it economically competitive.

Now, Obama wants to build rail roads, improve existing rails and build terminals and docks dedicated to the shipment of this sub-bituminous coal to China and most recently Mexico, all with your tax dollars. The Mexican plan is particularly interesting because the plan is to ship the coal to Mexico, where the Mexicans will build a coal burning power plant right on the Texas border, where the pollution will blow back across the border. No one has said who is going to pay for this power plant in Mexico, but chances are that it will also be built with US dollars because Mexico has plenty of oil and gas to power their electrical grid without building an expensive sub-bituminous coal plant and the railroad to carry the coal to the Mexican plant.

The crony partners in the sub-bituminous coal industry are even more interesting. The biggest partner seems to be Goldman Sachs, they have bought into the mining companies, both domestic and foreign, Goldman Sach are involved in building all the terminals and Warren Buffet has bought heavily into Goldman Sachs and other coal carrying rail lines, while Buffet’s railroads will be carrying most of the coal.

7 posted on 02/03/2013 9:38:21 AM PST by Eva
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Eva

The World Elite is slowly taking monopoly control and too many sheeple keep falling for the phony left, right fight in our government.

8 posted on 02/03/2013 9:46:50 AM PST by bmwcyle (People who do not study history are destine to believe really ignorant statements.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

The Green in enviromentalism is money. To a thief, it is a good idea to burn down his neighbors business to sift the ashes for spare change.

Because it destroys industry in America, it is a great thing for the Marxists to support. The more the industrys burn in the United States, the easier it is to compete with communism. When it costs more to fill out the government paperwork than to build the part, jobs move overseas.

This is the EPA’s purpose, to “share the wealth”.

Dirty Politicians love that project, thats why they created, support and protect the EPA.

Not Americans.

9 posted on 02/03/2013 10:23:43 AM PST by American in Israel (A wise man's heart directs him to the right, but the foolish mans heart directs him toward the left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bmwcyle

You’re right, that is exactly what is going on, a phony left, right battle. While the right thinks they are fighting the leftwing environmentalists, they are really supporting the leftwing socialists, but it is very difficult to convince Republicans that the environmental nazis are not the same people as the leftwing socialists/fascists.

It is even more interesting that this dichotomy on the left is causing a real problem with regard to the Keystone pipeline. The leftist greens are demanding that the Obama administration conduct a Programmatic Environmental Impact Study for the Keystone Pipeline as well as for the coal terminals and trains in the Pacific Northwest. Obama cannot very well grant them the PEIS for the Keystone and then deny it for the coal in the West. What he had done recently is to turn over the Keystone decision to the State Department, but Hillary declined to take any action or make any decision, turning over the decision process to John Kerry.

Meanwhile, the crony partners in the federal sub-bituminous coal are joining forces and closing ranks. Warren Buffet’s Berkshire Hathaway has invested heavily in Goldman Sachs, which is not only building the terminals, but is investing in the coal mining companies, as well, both Arch and Peabody. BNSF has also invested in the other coal train companies which hold some of the rail lines going to Oregon, rail lines which were being subsidized by the Carlyle group. The Obama crony foray into the energy sector is metastasizing, led by Goldman Sachs, Bershire Hathaway (BNSF), the Carlyle Group, Blackstone Group (bought another SUNOCO refinery) .

10 posted on 02/03/2013 11:20:11 AM PST by Eva
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Eva

You have got it. I wish more people did. The GOP is in on it also. When old Nancy said that these tea parters were hurting their perfectly good agreement between the Republicans and Democrats. This is what she was talking about.

11 posted on 02/03/2013 11:27:27 AM PST by bmwcyle (People who do not study history are destine to believe really ignorant statements.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | 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
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson