backtop


Print 58 comment(s) - last by Ghostmaker.. on Mar 15 at 8:27 PM


  (Source: livesavers.files.wordpress.com)
Ethanol is making a point that Big Oil is receiving subsidies and ethanol isn't

Ethanol is holding one huge, sarcastic birthday party for Big Oil in celebration of its oldest subsidy enacted 100 years ago.

The 100th birthday for oil's oldest subsidy -- which began in 1913 -- will be prepared by the Iowa Renewable Fuels Association (IRFA), which promotes Iowa ethanol and biodiesel growth, and the American Coalition for Ethanol (ACE), which encourages the production and use of ethanol.

“And it dawned on us a few months ago that this is in fact the 100th birthday for oil subsidies and this calls for a party, and I think people can assume our tongues are firmly planted in our cheeks when we say we’re going to celebrate that fact,” said Monte Shaw, executive director of IRFA.

Why is the ethanol industry doing this? According to Shaw, the ethanol blenders tax credit expired in 2011, and ethanol has been forced to continue on without any help. However, Big Oil, which is already the most profitable industry in the world, still receives subsidies. The oldest, continuous subsidy was enacted in 1913, which is the topic of the birthday party.

“What we’re saying is, they’re there," said Shaw. "And we’re sick and tired of members of Congress who don’t know any better or don’t want to know any better, saying, oh, why do you need the RFS?  Why do you this, why do you need that? Can’t you just compete on a level playing field? When the fact of the matter is, our competition has had 100 years of subsidization. They’ve had nearly 40 years of a petroleum mandate written into federal law that says unless you drive a flex-fuel vehicle, you will purchase gasoline with a minimum amount of petroleum (85% percent of petroleum). The playing field is overwhelmingly tilted to the oil industry and that has got to be a part of all discussions around the RFS."

The RFS is the Renewable Fuel Standard, which is a U.S. federal program that requires transportation fuel to have a certain amount of renewable fuels when sold in the U.S.

The birthday party, called "Century of Subsidies," will be held on Thursday, March 14, 2013 from 2:30 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. at 430 Dirksen Senate Office Building in Washington DC.

There will be cake.

Source: Domesticfuel.com



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: :p
By StanO360 on 3/13/2013 1:36:10 PM , Rating: 5
Government subsidy of research can yield benefits, but literally subsidizing industries rarely is (if ever), and even if it is for a while it NEVER goes away. And by the way, government and intelligence rarely mix, especially when results don't matter (solar panels vs. military). The purveyors of solar subsidies could care less if it's successful or not, and success or failure is not even a metric, just that "we did something".


RE: :p
By Reclaimer77 on 3/13/2013 1:52:37 PM , Rating: 3
I think they are desperately grabbing at straws. This "Subsidy-Party" is pathetic.

Yes while we would like to see all subsidies go away, there's just a HUGE and important difference. Their industry only exists because of subsidies. It's 100% subsidy driven!

Yes the oil industry receives some subsidies (mostly to help with hurdles the Government itself put in place), which is then absolutely dwarfed by the massive tax revenues they then generate for the Government. It's like borrowing 5 cents, and paying back fifty thousand dollars. Every year.

Not to even mention the amount of prosperity and quality of living the petroleum industry has made possible for the masses over the past 100 years.

When the ethanol crowd can claim the same (ie. never), then they might have a point.


RE: :p
By Samus on 3/14/2013 12:08:00 AM , Rating: 2
Damn Reclaimer you should be a lobbyist for the oil industry you won my ass over! Go big oil!


RE: :p
By JPForums on 3/14/2013 1:15:16 PM , Rating: 3
Good points. Assuming you are correct, it really puts these subsidies into perspective. However:
quote:
It's like borrowing 5 cents, and paying back fifty thousand dollars. Every year.
It seems to me such a small subsidy is meaningless at this point. It should be repealed if for no other reason than to shut the Ethanol industry up.

From the article:
quote:
They’ve had nearly 40 years of a petroleum mandate written into federal law that says unless you drive a flex-fuel vehicle, you will purchase gasoline with a minimum amount of petroleum (85% percent of petroleum).
What an interesting way to word it. Another wording would be, gasoline advertised for use in gasoline engines shall be at least 85% gasoline . I.E. if you want to slip large amounts of ethanol (or some other contaminate) into the mix you have to call it something else so that the majority of automobile owners don't ruin their vehicles using fuel that the engines weren't made for. Remember, gasoline didn't have any ethanol when that legislation was passed. Shame on the government for passing a law that forces an industry to tell people when they've modified a fuel in such a way that it could damage your vehicle. Oh, and biodiesel has been in use for a long time in vehicles that aren't "flex-fuel". All they had to do was put "bio" in front of the fuel to let people know it is different.


"The whole principle [of censorship] is wrong. It's like demanding that grown men live on skim milk because the baby can't have steak." -- Robert Heinlein














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki