GasBuddy Blog

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: All Things Ethanol > Topics	Add to favorite topics Post New Topic

Author	Topic: Oil Shills assault on ethanol	Post a Reply Back to Topics

goldseeker Champion Author West Virginia Posts:19,513 Points:2,714,815 Joined:Sep 2005	Message Posted: Jan 13, 2012 10:20:48 PM Ignore goldseeker Report Abuse It is truely amazing of the ongoing assault waged by the "oil shills" in here against ethanol. I will not mention any names, for we all know who they are. They have recently been crowing about the expiration of the ethanol subsidy VEetc that expired on Dec. 31. It was truly amazing of the campaign of misinformation that they waged against this so-called subsidy. One even went so far as to say that they did not approved of the misuse of their tax dollars. That's right, their tax dollars. Nothing could be farther from the truth! Look the VEetc was nothing more than a tax credit against a excise tax......a tax that never even got collected. In any case it is over now, so lets move on. Of course we know now that the anti-ethanol crowd is still belly aching over something. That is their nature. They always have and they always will complain about something. I am truly amazing that they never have anything better to offer. They seem to be happy of maintaining status quo and leading us down the path of self-destruction. Although they are quick to bash ethanol and other biofuels, seldom do they mention gas and oil, which has for Decades demanded a much larger slice of the pie. Lets take a close look at "The Historical Role of Federal Subsidies in Shaping America’s Energy Future" What Would Jefferson Do? I find this a very interesting title to a topic that covers all.This paper frames the ongoing debate about the appropriate size and scope of federal subsidies to the energy sector within the rich historical context of U.S. energy transitions, in order to help illuminate how current energy subsidies compare to past government support for the sector. From land grants for timber and coal in the 1800s to tax expenditures for oil and gas in the early 20th century, from federal investment in hydroelectric power to research and development funding for nuclear energy and today’s incentives for alternative energy sources, America’s support for energy innovation has helped drive our country’s growth for more than 200 years. The findings of this paper suggest that current renewable energy subsidies do not constitute an over-subsidized outlier when compared to the historical norm for emerging sources of energy. For instance. As a percentage of inflation-adjusted federal spending, nuclear subsidies accounted for more than 1% of the federal budget over their first 15 years, and oil and gas subsidies made up half a percent of the total budget, while renewables have constituted only about a tenth of a percent. That is to say, the federal commitment to O&G was five times greater than the federal commitment to renewables during the first 15 years of each subsidies’ life, and it was more than 10 times greater for nuclear. In inflation-adjusted dollars, nuclear spending averaged $3.3 billion over the first 15 years of subsidy life, and O&G subsidies averaged $1.8 billion, while renewables averaged less than $0.4 billion. Be sure to scroll through the entire document and check out all the charts and graphs. They are all broken down in to 4 categories of O&G, Nuclear, biofuels, and renewables (wind, solar, etc.) As you can see oil and gas along with nuclear got the lions share and biofuels and renewables are way down the list. Oh yes, don't forget the defense spending. $7.3 trillion!!! Wow!!! did you get that? An innovative approach comes from Roger Stern, an economic geographer at Princeton University who published a peer-reviewed study on the cost of keeping aircraft carriers in the Persian Gulf from 1976 to 2007. Because carriers patrol the gulf for the explicit mission of securing oil shipments, Stern was on solid ground in attributing that cost to oil. He had found an excellent metric. He combed through the Defense Department’s data ... and came up with a total, over three Decades, of $7.3 trillion. Yes, trillion. Now I ask you.....would it not be better to pull our navy out of the Persian Gulf and take only 10% of that money and invest it in alternative forms of energy????? If we would, I can assure you that we could be energy dependent much sooner than you think. In summary, I guess I would do as Jefferson would have done....support emerging energy technologies — to drive innovation, create jobs, protect our environment, enhance our national security in a time of rapid change, and to further a distinctly American way of life in which resources once thought to be endless are replaced by ones that actually are. [Edited by: goldseeker at 1/13/2012 10:26:03 PM EST]

goldseeker

Champion Author
West Virginia

Posts:19,513
Points:2,714,815
Joined:Sep 2005

Message Posted: Jan 13, 2012 10:20:48 PM

Ignore goldseeker Report Abuse

It is truely amazing of the ongoing assault waged by the "oil shills" in here against ethanol. I will not mention any names, for we all know who they are.

They have recently been crowing about the expiration of the ethanol subsidy VEetc that expired on Dec. 31. It was truly amazing of the campaign of misinformation that they waged against this so-called subsidy. One even went so far as to say that they did not approved of the misuse of their tax dollars. That's right, their tax dollars. Nothing could be farther from the truth! Look the VEetc was nothing more than a tax credit against a excise tax......a tax that never even got collected. In any case it is over now, so lets move on. Of course we know now that the anti-ethanol crowd is still belly aching over something. That is their nature. They always have and they always will complain about something. I am truly amazing that they never have anything better to offer. They seem to be happy of maintaining status quo and leading us down the path of self-destruction.

Although they are quick to bash ethanol and other biofuels, seldom do they mention gas and oil, which has for Decades demanded a much larger slice of the pie.
Lets take a close look at "The Historical Role of Federal Subsidies in Shaping America’s Energy Future"

What Would Jefferson Do?

I find this a very interesting title to a topic that covers all.This paper frames the ongoing debate about the appropriate size and scope of federal subsidies to the energy sector within the rich historical context of U.S. energy transitions, in order to help illuminate how current energy subsidies compare to past government support for the sector. From
land grants for timber and coal in the 1800s to tax expenditures for oil and gas in the early 20th century, from federal investment in hydroelectric
power to research and development funding for nuclear energy and today’s incentives for alternative energy sources, America’s support for energy innovation has helped drive our country’s growth for more than 200 years.

The findings of this paper suggest that current renewable energy subsidies do not constitute an over-subsidized outlier when compared to the historical norm for emerging sources of energy.

For instance.

As a percentage of inflation-adjusted federal spending, nuclear subsidies accounted for more than 1% of the federal budget over their first 15 years, and oil and gas subsidies made up half a percent of the total budget, while renewables have constituted only about a tenth of a percent. That is to say, the federal commitment to O&G was five times greater than the federal
commitment to renewables during the first 15 years of each subsidies’ life, and it was more than 10 times greater for nuclear.

In inflation-adjusted dollars, nuclear spending averaged $3.3 billion over the first 15 years of subsidy life, and O&G subsidies averaged $1.8
billion, while renewables averaged less than $0.4 billion.

Be sure to scroll through the entire document and check out all the charts and graphs.

They are all broken down in to 4 categories of O&G, Nuclear, biofuels, and renewables (wind, solar, etc.)

As you can see oil and gas along with nuclear got the lions share and biofuels and renewables are way down the list.

Oh yes, don't forget the defense spending. $7.3 trillion!!! Wow!!! did you get that?

An innovative approach comes from Roger Stern, an economic geographer at Princeton University who published a peer-reviewed study on the cost of keeping aircraft carriers in the Persian Gulf from 1976 to 2007. Because carriers patrol the gulf for the explicit mission of securing oil shipments, Stern was on solid ground in attributing that cost to oil. He had found an excellent metric. He combed through the Defense Department’s data ... and came up with a total, over three Decades, of $7.3 trillion. Yes, trillion.

Now I ask you.....would it not be better to pull our navy out of the Persian Gulf and take only 10% of that money and invest it in alternative forms of energy????? If we would, I can assure you that we could be energy dependent much sooner than you think.

In summary, I guess I would do as Jefferson would have done....support emerging energy technologies — to drive innovation, create jobs, protect our environment, enhance our national security in a time of rapid change, and to further a distinctly American way of life in which resources once
thought to be endless are replaced by ones that actually are.

[Edited by: goldseeker at 1/13/2012 10:26:03 PM EST]

REPLIES (newest first)Ignore Short Messages

Hannie59 All-Star Author Appleton Posts:582 Points:15,115 Joined:Apr 2010	Message Posted: May 26, 2012 3:46:00 PM Ignore Hannie59 Report Abuse goldseeker makes a very good point here. This MO would be great but those whom have a vested interest in this innovation not happening are fortunate enough to have a monopoly on transportation fuel in this country. People YOU can change this! Google benefits of ethanol, e100ethanolgroup, many other groups. The truth is out there but you gotta find your way through the false information :) The oil agenda is to mislead you by "sounding" logical and playing on emotions with fallacies such as "food vs. fuel"...it ISN'T one or the other folks. No matter what you think of alcohol fuel today, seek data, seek logic, seek facts. Ethanol fuel is great for the citizens of this country, the citizens of this world, and the planet. [Edited by: Hannie59 at 5/26/2012 3:51:06 PM EST]
Waterman66 Champion Author Colorado Posts:1,386 Points:490,320 Joined:Apr 2007	Message Posted: May 14, 2012 8:54:37 PM Ignore Waterman66 Report Abuse Timmayc4, I had a pickup with 2 tanks on it. For years I ran E10 in one and straight in the other. On long trips I would switch back every 50 miles. Good test because you aren't mixing in the tanks. It is just what is in the fuel line. Never saw a hoots worth of difference between the 2. Saw much more of a difference between stations than the ethanol.
timmyC4 Veteran Author Twin Cities Posts:417 Points:60,600 Joined:May 2007	Message Posted: May 14, 2012 4:24:13 PM Ignore timmyC4 Report Abuse I'm all for ethanol, as long is it gives me at the least the same $ for $ value in energy. If you are not for this, you are a fool.
Waterman66 Champion Author Colorado Posts:1,386 Points:490,320 Joined:Apr 2007	Message Posted: May 14, 2012 1:16:25 PM Ignore Waterman66 Report Abuse Interesting article Goldseeker. I always laugh at the anti-ethanol crowd. All of the purported facts that they claim. One of the funniest is that they claim reduced mileage with ethanol of greater than 10%. Well if that was true the oil companies would be loving ethanol since they would be using as much or more oil than before. But yet all you hear is how big oil doesn't like ethanol because it impacts how much oil/gasoline they can sell. [Edited by: Waterman66 at 5/14/2012 1:17:21 PM EST]
SilverStreaker Champion Author Twin Cities Posts:11,918 Points:2,212,370 Joined:Mar 2006	Message Posted: May 13, 2012 1:20:45 AM Ignore SilverStreaker Report Abuse jamieg2012 says "i see all the anti ethanol claims and scare tricks here but never seen any anti ethanol posts that actually came with credible research" I'm glad I listened to the people who actually use ethanol and know what they are talking about. I save money every time I add ethanol to my tank.
jamieg2012 Veteran Author Sioux Falls Posts:286 Points:11,385 Joined:Jan 2012	Message Posted: Apr 4, 2012 10:04:01 PM Ignore jamieg2012 Report Abuse brerrrabbittx if we get technology developed to the point we can use faster growing crops like grasses and even use the rest of the corn plant then we can get more bio fuels made and replace more and more oil since making bio fuels from faster growing crops makes more and more supply available what we need to do is yes take away from some food - like the high fructose corn syrup since people keep going around claiming people just is way too fat so take the supply away from pure junk food and we help 2 problems 1 - less and less junk food supply makes people eat healthier so less and less people being too fat and 2 - more supply for ethanol there - i created a supply that did not take away from regular healthy eating and in a way that solves all the people complaining about people being too fat and eating way too much junk food we take the supply of corn away from junk food then we solve many problems and this even goes to less and less people with heart problems and diabetes and other diseases caused by just being fat and eating junk food take a minute to think about all this people
jamieg2012 Veteran Author Sioux Falls Posts:286 Points:11,385 Joined:Jan 2012	Message Posted: Apr 3, 2012 5:17:21 PM Ignore jamieg2012 Report Abuse i see all the anti ethanol claims and scare tricks here but never seen any anti ethanol posts that actually came with credible research so far the closest to research is some guy filled up 1 time and compared fuel economy to e0 but does not meet scientific standards since there was no controls to guarantee driving conditions and habits did not change or even average over a period of 100000 miles like the lake area tech study did lake area tech and the non flex tahoe on e85 was at least research since they had over 100000 miles to give a long term average to account for variables in driving habits and conditions also i question whether the older car that was supposedly destroyed did not have other problems that would have made a part fail no matter what and claims of destroying a fuel pump is just from build up junk being cleaned out and happens with the all favorite sea foam and other fuel system cleaners even stp stuff just does not add up to actual research standards to me
SilverStreaker Champion Author Twin Cities Posts:11,918 Points:2,212,370 Joined:Mar 2006	Message Posted: Apr 3, 2012 10:49:12 AM Ignore SilverStreaker Report Abuse Roger Stern's peer-reviewed study on the cost of keeping aircraft carriers in the Persian Gulf from 1976 to 2007: $7.3 trillion.
emtrob2012 All-Star Author Myrtle Beach Posts:888 Points:146,830 Joined:Jan 2012	Message Posted: Feb 18, 2012 1:23:39 PM Ignore emtrob2012 Report Abuse I hate ethanol....use them on lawn mowers, not cars
Edpap Champion Author Pennsylvania Posts:4,304 Points:502,925 Joined:Oct 2011	Message Posted: Feb 18, 2012 12:21:46 PM Ignore Edpap Report Abuse The ethanol industry needs put on the back burner until it develops technology using only sewage or garbage, not food or building products.
showtyme34 Sophomore Author Boise Posts:123 Points:324,305 Joined:Dec 2004	Message Posted: Feb 18, 2012 11:33:59 AM Ignore showtyme34 Report Abuse How much kool-aid does one guy have to drink before he gets sick? Give it up, goldseeker.
RedRider1OK All-Star Author Oklahoma City Posts:943 Points:25,440 Joined:Mar 2008	Message Posted: Feb 9, 2012 7:18:38 PM Ignore RedRider1OK Report Abuse Where's Goldi? I noticed you're posting your normal ethanol shill rhetoric on other topics, so why are you avoiding your own Oil Shill Assault topic? Maybe because IT'S THE 4TH TIME I'VE REQUESTED AN ANSWER FROM YOU and you know I caught you in a lie. So here we go again... Goldi states "I can live just fine without crude oil." Ok prove it and answer the question: When was the last time you bought or used a product made from crude oil? Simple question, simple answer, we're waiting.....
reb4 Champion Author Chicago Posts:19,075 Points:1,818,125 Joined:Sep 2004	Message Posted: Feb 8, 2012 11:15:12 PM Ignore reb4 Report Abuse redrider, goldseeker has been quite open in the past that he does not use e85 since there is none to be had near him or the station is not open for convenience. whatever....On page 303 (i think) of this report shows that e85 lags far behind in actual consumption... What is sad is that most of the people that so adamantly support it don't even use it. There is one person that boasts that they see no difference in the gas mileage of e85 over e10 and yet he has admittedly only uses it 1/2 of the time....
RedRider1OK All-Star Author Oklahoma City Posts:943 Points:25,440 Joined:Mar 2008	Message Posted: Feb 8, 2012 9:30:50 PM Ignore RedRider1OK Report Abuse Hey Goldi, 3rd time to request an answer from you. Goldi states "I can live just fine without crude oil." Ok prove it and answer the question: When was the last time you bought or used a product made from crude oil? Simple question, simple answer... Can you do it?
brerrabbitTX Champion Author Houston Posts:1,023 Points:18,145 Joined:Mar 2011	Message Posted: Feb 2, 2012 4:18:40 PM Ignore brerrabbitTX Report Abuse I have been accussed of many things and freely accept the labels so oil shill it is. I work in the industry and have for 30 years. I have no problem with ethanol and it has become a piece of the puzzle and will be until such time as we shift the entire personal transportation way of thinking to a new paradigm. I won't argue any specifics about ethanol because there is more information for and against it available on the internet than there is time in this life to read it. Here are the realities and questions I ask and can never get a "ethanol shill" to answer. Although I will admit as an admitted oil shill I don't have the answers either. You want ethanol to replace gas? Great fine wonderful lets go. But..... Where do we get 2,926,000,000 barrels a year of ethanol from. Number is based on a really low estimate of 8 million barrels a day. Published report dated January 31 said the latest weeks usage was up .4 percent to 8.508 million barrels for the prior week. Use every ear of corn and sugar cane grown on the planet and throw in a bunch of alternatives as well and I don't think you can come near that production rate. Secondly, if miraculosly we find the ethanol somewhere how much money and investment (which if you have not noticed we are having a little problem with lately here in the US) would we need to build all the plants we would need to produce that amount of ethanol? Then once you produce it how do you get it distributed? Current technology does not have the ability to transport ethanol via pipelines. It is sent by rail car or truck into the distribution system today. Third once you have solved all these issues what the heck do we do with all the invested capital in refineries, pipelines, terminals and other assets associated with the current oil based infrastructure? How many people lose their job and where does the US economy go? Lastly an observation. By default any tax credit offered by the federal government is as a taxpayers dollar. If they do not collect it from the original source intended (in the case of ethanol the blender of record) then in order to raise the same amount of revenue the government has to find the cash somewhere else. So basically offer a tax credit I can't use and you are subsidizing that credit with my taxes. Give me a credit others can't use and you are subsidizing me with others tax dollars. The ethanol credit that went away December 31 was a line item at the bottom of every invoice to wholesalers and jobbers as they loaded product at a terminal to take to a retail location. That credit was offered because the seller, who was effectively the blender of record because ethanol and gas are blended just prior to loading it onto a truck in turn got to reduce their federal tax liability. It was a straight pass thru of the credit. Now here is the part that will rock your world. Those blenders of record are in large part the big bad oil companies. I work in the business, I have seen the invoice, I know how it works. So call a shill a shill if you must and point them out but remember as you point your finger at somebody and call them a shill, three of your fingers are pointing right back at yourself.
rhail2 Champion Author Kentucky Posts:1,452 Points:287,485 Joined:Apr 2011	Message Posted: Jan 28, 2012 3:42:00 PM Ignore rhail2 Report Abuse ok
goldseeker Champion Author West Virginia Posts:19,513 Points:2,714,815 Joined:Sep 2005	Message Posted: Jan 28, 2012 1:53:48 AM Ignore goldseeker Report Abuse aRBy: I hear what you are saying. However, I think a better alternative would be E-100 There are now three states that already produce enough ethanol to run e100 in every car in their state. It is very easy to build cars that will be ethanol dedicated. Detroit is already supplying cars to Brazil that can run up to E100. Va. Tech has already shown that a dedicated ethanol car can get excellent mileage. Heck, even I can convert a car to run on straight ethanol for a few hundred dollars.
CORNHICK All-Star Author Omaha Posts:596 Points:269,885 Joined:May 2008	Message Posted: Jan 27, 2012 11:52:05 PM Ignore CORNHICK Report Abuse im not reading that whole thing haha
aRBy Veteran Author Grand Rapids Posts:447 Points:300,930 Joined:May 2005	Message Posted: Jan 27, 2012 11:17:56 PM Ignore aRBy Report Abuse I'm not sorry that the VEETC subsidy has ended. The subsidy was good to get the ethanol fuel industry started. It's usefulness has ended. I'd also add that I've grown tired of people griping about the subsidies. What we really need is passage of the Open Fuels Standard Act that will increase the number of flex fuel vehicles on the road. With fuel CHOICE, we can let the free market go to work. Given all the turmoil in the Persian Gulf and the constant difficulties facing gasoline refineries, E85 prices remain stable. As time goes on and more flex fuel vehicles are on the road, ethanol production is likely to continue to grow... without subsidies. Flex fuel vehicles give their owners a "Plan B" for those periods when gasoline inventories get tight. Those who refuse to buy flex fuel vehicles leave themselves vulnerable to the constant volatility in petroleum prices. In my view, it makes sense to buy a flex fuel vehicle even if you never plan to put a drop of E85 in it. With a flex fuel vehicle, you will always have a "Plan B"; something we didn't have during the gasoline shortages of the past.
rhail2 Champion Author Kentucky Posts:1,452 Points:287,485 Joined:Apr 2011	Message Posted: Jan 19, 2012 9:50:13 AM Ignore rhail2 Report Abuse good
emtrob2012 All-Star Author Myrtle Beach Posts:888 Points:146,830 Joined:Jan 2012	Message Posted: Jan 18, 2012 10:43:30 PM Ignore emtrob2012 Report Abuse Drill baby drill...but drill responsibly Stop this dependency on foreign oil Also, stop sending gasoline overseas...let them refine their own gasonline... Oil and Gas is here to stay...we cannot grow our way out of this ....
RedRider1OK All-Star Author Oklahoma City Posts:943 Points:25,440 Joined:Mar 2008	Message Posted: Jan 18, 2012 7:52:01 PM Ignore RedRider1OK Report Abuse ?Again for Goldi: When was the last time you bought or used a product made from crude oil? Goldi states "I can live just fine without crude oil." Ok prove it and answer the question above that I now have asked for the second time.
OceanArcher Champion Author Mississippi Posts:5,688 Points:1,324,375 Joined:May 2004	Message Posted: Jan 18, 2012 4:18:35 PM Ignore OceanArcher Report Abuse OK - I'll grant for the sake of discussion the presence of "oil shills" ... now, can anyone spell "Ethanol Shill" ??
goldseeker Champion Author West Virginia Posts:19,513 Points:2,714,815 Joined:Sep 2005	Message Posted: Jan 18, 2012 2:21:19 PM Ignore goldseeker Report Abuse "I thought it was people that were the number one polluter in the world..." That is basically true.....and that is one good reason to not live in Chicago. There are more polluting cars in Chicago than there is in the entire state of WVA. "I may be a "shill", but ending subsidies to something that is a proven net negative in energy and causes food price increase seems pretty sane to me..." Brian, I don't really care if you are a shill or not. There are numerous studies out there that shows ethanol has a net energy balance and also that oil prices have a greater impact on food prices. [Edited by: goldseeker at 1/18/2012 2:23:37 PM EST]
SilverStreaker Champion Author Twin Cities Posts:11,918 Points:2,212,370 Joined:Mar 2006	Message Posted: Jan 18, 2012 10:38:40 AM Ignore SilverStreaker Report Abuse BrianJ48, what are your sources for your claims that ethanol has a "proven net negative in energy and causes food price increase" According to the US Department of Energy, it only takes 0.74 BTU of fossil energy to create 1 BTU of corn ethanol. Comparatively, it takes 1.23 of fossil energy to make 1 BTU of gasoline. Regarding food prices, The Conference Board of Canada recently published a report that concludes "Studies that have examined both the impact of crude oil prices and biofuels demand on agricultural prices conclude that oil prices are the more influential factor". [Edited by: SilverStreaker at 1/18/2012 10:40:09 AM EST]
krzysiek_ck Champion Author Illinois Posts:5,307 Points:725,135 Joined:Apr 2011	Message Posted: Jan 18, 2012 10:32:05 AM Ignore krzysiek_ck Report Abuse "I may be a "shill", but ending subsidies to something that is a proven net negative in energy and causes food price increase seems pretty sane to me..." Please enlighten us with the links to this "proven" information.
BrianJ48 Rookie Author New York Posts:42 Points:43,105 Joined:Jan 2012	Message Posted: Jan 18, 2012 10:08:59 AM Ignore BrianJ48 Report Abuse I may be a "shill", but ending subsidies to something that is a proven net negative in energy and causes food price increase seems pretty sane to me...
krzysiek_ck Champion Author Illinois Posts:5,307 Points:725,135 Joined:Apr 2011	Message Posted: Jan 18, 2012 8:35:22 AM Ignore krzysiek_ck Report Abuse "I thought it was people that were the number one polluter in the world..." Probably because of the gas production from eating corn products.
reb4 Champion Author Chicago Posts:19,075 Points:1,818,125 Joined:Sep 2004	Message Posted: Jan 18, 2012 8:18:49 AM Ignore reb4 Report Abuse I thought it was people that were the number one polluter in the world... And if I remember, you use quite a bit of oil goldseeker... How much money did you spend on gasoline products last year...
goldseeker Champion Author West Virginia Posts:19,513 Points:2,714,815 Joined:Sep 2005	Message Posted: Jan 18, 2012 8:04:51 AM Ignore goldseeker Report Abuse "ETHANOL is no substitute for crude oil. Quit slamming the companies that make our lives what they are today. " Oh, what a wonderful life. Crude oil is the number one pollutant in the world today. It is clearly one of the reasons we have such a high cancer rate. One in every three Americans will end up with cancer sometime in their life. No thank you. I can live just fine without crude oil. As for you red. If you cannot handle the heat, then I suggest you stay out of here!
RedRider1OK All-Star Author Oklahoma City Posts:943 Points:25,440 Joined:Mar 2008	Message Posted: Jan 17, 2012 9:53:37 PM Ignore RedRider1OK Report Abuse Recheck on spelling/grammer...Too late to edit. ? for Goldi. When was the last time you bought or used a product made from crude oil? ETHANOL is no substitute for crude oil. Quit slamming the companies that make our lives what they are today.
RedRider1OK All-Star Author Oklahoma City Posts:943 Points:25,440 Joined:Mar 2008	Message Posted: Jan 17, 2012 8:41:39 PM Ignore RedRider1OK Report Abuse "that's right, their tax dollars. Nothing could be farther from the truth! Look the VEetc was nothing more than a tax credit against a excise tax......a tax that never even got collected" The 45 cent/gallon tax credit was a guarantee to the ethanol producers for higher selling prices. They knew their product would be discounted once it was blended so they kept their prices high. You could call it a guaranteed 20% profit margin. Well, that's gone and their prices now have dropped accordingly. As far as the rest of Goldi's rant...Bla,Bla,Bla! ? for Goldi. When was the last time you bought or purchased a product made from crude oil.? I thought so. I don't work for Big Oil and I'm not associated with them, but if I was I would thank you (Goldi) for supporting Big Oil through your purchases and use of products derived from Big Oil. ETHANOL is no substitute for crude oil. Quite slamming the companies that make our lives what they are today. [Edited by: RedRider1OK at 1/17/2012 8:42:33 PM EST]
GrumpyCat Champion Author Alabama Posts:2,591 Points:786,615 Joined:Jun 2009	Message Posted: Jan 17, 2012 3:49:09 PM Ignore GrumpyCat Report Abuse Ditto Emmett! The only problem with ethanol is that biodiesel was always a better solution.
emmettgalloway Champion Author Louisiana Posts:1,905 Points:327,905 Joined:Jun 2005	Message Posted: Jan 14, 2012 9:13:15 AM Ignore emmettgalloway Report Abuse When faced with a position which cannot be defended, the only recourse is to attempt to move the discussion away from the question at hand.