The Briefing Room
General Category => Science, Technology and Knowledge => Energy => Topic started by: Free Vulcan on May 19, 2016, 04:58:26 pm
-
EPA DROPS NEW RENEWABLE FUEL STANDARD: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Wednesday rolled out its proposed blending mandates for ethanol and other biofuels, and both sides in the debate are displeased.
Under the Wednesday plan, 18.8 billion gallons of biofuels would have to be blended into the nation's gasoline and diesel, and 14.8 billion gallons could be ethanol.
And while the total volume is 700 million gallons above this year and the ethanol volume is up 300 million gallons, the totals aren't what Congress wrote into the law in 2007.
Instead, the EPA is proposing to use a waiver authority written into the law, citing factors like a lower than expected demand for gasoline and diesel.
"This administration is committed to keeping the [renewable fuels standard] program on track, spurring continued growth in biofuel production and use, and achieving the climate and energy independence benefits that Congress envisioned from this program," Janet McCabe, head of the EPA's air pollution office, said in a statement.
The ethanol industry said it's completely unacceptable that the EPA still isn't setting the levels in the statute, and its use of the waiver is improper.
Read more: http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/overnights/280425-overnight-energy-epa-wants-higher-ethanol-blend-mandate
-
Tens of millions of regular gas engines-lawn movers, riding tractors, farm tractors will be ruined by increased ethanol unless someone comes up with a additive to keep the gasket and rubber from being destroyed.
-
Tens of millions of regular gas engines-lawn movers, riding tractors, farm tractors will be ruined by increased ethanol unless someone comes up with a additive to keep the gasket and rubber from being destroyed.
Not to mention that ethanol is the last thing I'd process corn into. So many better alternatives like specialty chemicals.
-
I'd like to remind everybody that Trump is fine with ethanol standards, and Ryan fully supported them in last budget.
Only Ted Cruz took it on, with the result he won Iowa, where corn is king.
-
I'd like to remind everybody that Trump is fine with ethanol standards, and Ryan fully supported them in last budget.
Only Ted Cruz took it on, with the result he won Iowa, where corn is king.
Trump's announcement about the ethanol mandate (after Cruz incurred the wrath of Iowa's Governor and his ethanol lobbyist son) was that Trump would support keeping and maybe increasing the mandate and use the EPA to enforce it to the fullest extent of the law
Keeping the EPA is incompatible with restoring American Industry. That is one of the things (combined with tort law and some aspects of organized labor) that pushed industry out of the country.
-
Noooooooooo
-
I'd like to remind everybody that Trump is fine with ethanol standards, and Ryan fully supported them in last budget.
Only Ted Cruz took it on, with the result he won Iowa, where corn is king.
I'd like to remind everybody that Trump wants to limit of eliminate the DOE and EPA. Will congress agree?
-
I'd like to remind everybody that Trump wants to limit of eliminate the DOE and EPA. Will congress agree?
Did Trump LIE in IOWA? Or is he lying Now?
-
Did Trump LIE in IOWA? Or is he lying Now?
What's changed? Didn't we discuss this before?
-
I'd like to remind everybody that Trump wants to limit of eliminate the DOE and EPA. Will congress agree?
In this campaign, Trump has called for an expansion of the ethanol mandate.
Trump calls for higher ethanol mandate
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/266339-trump-calls-for-higher-ethanol-mandate
Donald Trump said Tuesday that federal regulators should increase the amount of ethanol blended into the nation’s gasoline supply.
-
I would just like to remind everyone that if all inputs are considered it takes 1.2 units of energy to produce 1 unit of energy from corn based ethanol.
http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/2001/08/ethanol-corn-faulted-energy-waster-scientist-says
-
In this campaign, Trump has called for an expansion of the ethanol mandate.
Trump calls for higher ethanol mandate
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/266339-trump-calls-for-higher-ethanol-mandate
This has been discussed here previously. I believe when Trump is fully educated on the costs associated with ethanol for vehicle fuel, he will change his mind. This is what those of us against ethanol use are up against.
http://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/news-releases/grassley-responds-ethanol-smear-campaign
-
So supporting Trump is based upon him changing his mind, rather than his current remarks and opinions
-
So supporting Trump is based upon him changing his mind, rather than his current remarks and opinions
Nope. There are no perfect candidates or humans for that matter. Midwest farmers and politicians, many conservative Republicans support ethanol programs. I don't. So what do you propose?
-
Did Trump LIE in IOWA? Or is he lying Now?
(https://scontent-dfw1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/13221511_1155088577877137_2378692710164238513_n.jpg?oh=aef1165e594f433b5d92e9fae65e8cf4&oe=57CCD11E)
-
This has been discussed here previously. I believe when Trump is fully educated on the costs associated with ethanol for vehicle fuel, he will change his mind. This is what those of us against ethanol use are up against.
http://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/news-releases/grassley-responds-ethanol-smear-campaign
So you are advocating another learn-on-the-fly President rather than one already prepared for the job?
No thanks, we have one already there.
-
So you are advocating another learn-on-the-fly President rather than one already prepared for the job?
No thanks, we have one already there.
Tell me, which human being do you believe knows everything?
-
Tell me, which human being do you believe knows everything?
It ain't Trump, who pretty much knows nothing about policy.
-
So both Trump and Clinton are fine with the ethanol mandates. Maybe there's some other way to tell them apart. :pondering:
-
So both Trump and Clinton are fine with the ethanol mandates. Maybe there's some other way to tell them apart. :pondering:
I've tried but the only difference I have thus far found is that one has a Y chromosome and the other doesn't.
-
So both Trump and Clinton are fine with the ethanol mandates. Maybe there's some other way to tell them apart. :pondering:
http://ethanolproducer.com/articles/12160/37-senators-issue-letter-in-support-of-a-strong-rfs
By Erin Voegele | April 24, 2015
[
A bipartisan group of 37 senators have send a letter to the U.S. EPA urging the agency to reverse course from the 2014 proposed rule and maintain a strong renewable fuel standard (RFS) to drive innovation and growth in America’s economy while helping reduce our dependence on foreign oil.
-
Non sequitur.
-
Non sequitur.
To one who refuses to face reality.
-
http://ethanolproducer.com/articles/12160/37-senators-issue-letter-in-support-of-a-strong-rfs
By Erin Voegele | April 24, 2015
[
A bipartisan group of 37 senators have send a letter to the U.S. EPA urging the agency to reverse course from the 2014 proposed rule and maintain a strong renewable fuel standard (RFS) to drive innovation and growth in America’s economy while helping reduce our dependence on foreign oil.
The only GOP in this group are in heavy corn producing areas, other than the idiot Lindsey.
Not too persuasive
-
The reality is that corn does not belong in our cars' gas tanks, and the government never should have gotten involved.
-
The only GOP in this group are in heavy corn producing areas, other than the idiot Lindsey.
Not too persuasive
Would you expect representatives of corn producing states to be against ethanol production? I'm a realist.
I don't support ethanol production for alternate fuel, but I'm a realist.
-
Would you expect representatives of corn producing states to be against ethanol production? I'm a realist.
I don't support ethanol production for alternate fuel, but I'm a realist.
You better go read up on who won the Iowa caususes. He went against ethanol, so yes I can expect real conservatives can win by doing that.
And you are getting tiresome as far as having a real discusiion.
That is what I call realism
-
You better go read up on who won the Iowa caususes. He went against ethanol, so yes I can expect real conservatives can win by doing that.
And you are getting tiresome as far as having a real discusiion.
That is what I call realism
Caucuses as you know are not a reflection of the voters. How many corn farmers do you suppose voted for Cruz? Why do you believe Grassley supports ethanol production? I'm a realist, you're an ideologue living in fantasy land.
-
Nope. There are no perfect candidates or humans for that matter. Midwest farmers and politicians, many conservative Republicans support ethanol programs. I don't. So what do you propose?
I'm not after perfection. But when candidates seem to take both sides of many issues, the voter should be very wary.
-
I'm not after perfection. But when candidates seem to take both sides of many issues, the voter should be very wary.
This guy can not be convinced,even with facts showing he is wrong.
You saw a few of these on TOS.
I would waste No more time with him.
-
Caucuses as you know are not a reflection of the voters. How many corn farmers do you suppose voted for Cruz? Why do you believe Grassley supports ethanol production? I'm a realist, you're an ideologue living in fantasy land.
Many conservatives here in Iowa hate the ethanol mandate. Not ethanol, but the mandate.
-
http://ethanolproducer.com/articles/12160/37-senators-issue-letter-in-support-of-a-strong-rfs
By Erin Voegele | April 24, 2015
[
A bipartisan group of 37 senators have send a letter to the U.S. EPA urging the agency to reverse course from the 2014 proposed rule and maintain a strong renewable fuel standard (RFS) to drive innovation and growth in America’s economy while helping reduce our dependence on foreign oil.
For starters, I figured at least a minimum of 37% of the senate were idiots, and I believe the case could be made for more. If you think having politicians decide what should be scientific or engineering issues is a good idea, just wait until they are rooting and digging in your health care--OH WAIT, They are!!!
And just how does it reduce our dependency on foreign oil? I could see conversion of coal to synfuels doing that, but not burning a fuel with significantly less BTU yield per unit volume than gasoline, and which takes more fuel to produce than it yields.
By the same token, the EPA has fought tooth and nail against the 80 year old process of hydraulic fracturing even without ANY proof of damage to surface waters or groundwater and while those jerks were on their witch hunt we still managed to put the US producing more oil than Saudi, in less than 10 years. There's plenty more where that came from, we know where it is, and we know how to get it.
No one is saying ban ethanol production, we are saying to do away with the mandate and subsidies and let the market decide.
I'll opt for using real gasoline in vehicles I have going back to 1941, small engines, outboards, chainsaws, and other equipment. The vehicles get 10% better gas mileage on real gasoline than E10, and fuel system components don't corrode away.
We had a candidate who was so unconcerned about the cronyism in Corn Country that he said he'd do away with that mandate, which put him in the starting blocks and headed the right direction. Instead, hanging your hat on someone 'seeing the light' (MAYBE) doesn't seem like a good action plan.
-
Would you expect representatives of corn producing states to be against ethanol production? I'm a realist.
I don't support ethanol production for alternate fuel, but I'm a realist.
You misstate the question.
It isn't a question of whether ethanol will be able to be produced as a fuel, or even just a fuel additive. It is a Question of whether blending ethanol with fuel will be MANDATED.
I am all for letting the market decide. how much ethanol will be produced, how much will be blended, etc. I am sure there are E85 and flexfuel vehicle drivers who would be happy to be what they consider to be 'environmentally conscious' and continue buying ethanol blended products.
But it might afford the folks back in the area I grew up in the opportunity to buy fuel for their outboard motors which would not destroy the fuel systems and potentially leave them stranded in life threatening situations out on the water.
In the meantime, let's put that corn to good use and build back the beef herds and reduce the price of a steak. I remember prime rib and ribeyes selling for what hamburger does now.