More Top Stories:

Ethanol Loses Its Few Friends

Editor’s Note:  This problem goes back to the same issue as the imposition of a U.N. Controlled Refugee program being forced on the states.  There is ZERO Constitutional Authority to enact either.  When we ALLOW the federal government to make LAWLESS legislation we turn ourselves into SLAVES of the national government.
Listen to today’s Krisanne Hall Podcast and hear the truth.

Early in his campaign, now top-tier Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson supported ethanol—a position for which I called him out. It has long been thought that to win in Iowa, a candidate must support ethanol.

However, in a major policy reversal, during the CNBC GOP debate, Carson announced that he no longer supports subsidies for any industry, including U.S. ethanol producers: “I have studied that issue in great detail and what I’ve concluded, the best policy is to get rid of all government subsidies and get the government out of our lives and let people rise and fall based on how good they are.”

[the_ad_group id=" 19874"] story continues below

The ethanol industry responded, saying it receives no government subsidies. But it neglected to mention a very important fact. Instead of subsidies, ethanol producers get something better: a mandate that orders refiners to blend ethanol into motor fuels and which forces consumers to buy their product. A federally guaranteed market beats a subsidy every time.

The ethanol industry also benefits indirectly from agriculture programs that support farmers who grow corn for ethanol. And recently, the Obama Administration announced the U.S. Department of Agriculture is offering $100 million in grants to subsidize the installation of blender pumps at gas stations all over the country.

In attempting to push more ethanol into the motor fuel market, the Environmental Protection Agency admits it plans to “drive growth in renewable fuels by providing appropriate incentives.”

[the_ad_group id=" 19874"] story continues below

Trending Stories

Carson, and a majority of Republicans and many Democrats, knows the ethanol mandate is a program that has gone horribly wrong. Enacted by a well-meaning Congress, in a different energy era, it is part of the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS), which requires refiners to add biofuels to gasoline and diesel.

Ethanol-blended fuel provides fewer miles per gallon because ethanol contains only two-thirds as much energy as gasoline, forcing motorists to fill up more often.

The mandate puts at risk millions of vehicles owned and operated by private citizens and fleets. Ethanol is corrosive. In tests, it has been proven to eat engine components, including seals and gaskets, causing expensive repairs.

Likewise, marine engine makers also caution boat owners to avoid fuels with high percentages of ethanol. During winter storage, they suggest pouring a fuel stabilizer into built-in gas tanks to avoid problems. A survey of boat owners has shown ethanol-related repairs cost an average of about $1,000.

These are just some of the costs that impact consumers who buy fuel. Yet the RFS continues to stumble along because Congress has not mustered the will to repeal it.

By November 30, the Obama administration must finalize the amount of biofuels to be blended into motor fuels in the next couple of years. A pitched battle is developing on Capitol Hill. On one side are those who want an even larger market share for ethanol. On the other side are those who see the program for what it is—a massive payout to one allegedly “green” industry.

The latter group includes more than 180 Washington lawmakers who…

 if the watchman sees the sword coming and does not blow the trumpet, and the people are not warned, and the sword comes and takes any person from among them, he is taken away in his iniquity; but his blood I will require at the watchman’s hand.


Opinions posted on are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
%d bloggers like this: