Biofuels industry liable to lose their federal funding

posted at 2:01 pm on July 11, 2012 by Erika Johnsen

House Republicans are looking to eliminate government funding for the biofuels industry through the farm bill — and it feels so good. I am always pleased when any federally subsidized product, service, or industry is finally forced to face the music and compete in the free market based on its meritorious profitability rather than its political profitability.  …Granted, that doesn’t seem to happen often, due the ever-expanding size of our federal bureaucracy and the ensuing tendency to nurture bad policies, but it looks like the biofuels industry may at last find itself released back into the wild of unsubsidized competition.

Biomass and biofuels groups warn that the loss of $800 million in guaranteed federal support would stall progress in developing the fuel source and cause job losses in rural communities that can least afford it.

The industry claims interest groups such as fossil fuel producers and livestock owners have hijacked the process as the House Agriculture Committee begins a markup of the bill this week. …

House Republicans say the plans to choke off funding for biofuels and biomass projects reflect the basic fiscal reality that cuts have to come from somewhere. …

The funding goes toward a variety of loans and grants for bio-refineries and renewable-energy programs, as well as subsidies for dedicated energy crops.

Hmmm. If the loss of federal funding would stall biofuels’ progress, can we be sure that it’s a viable fuel source currently worth the costs? If, without government subsidies, the biofuels industry would bleed jobs, are those really productive jobs that add to economic growth, or are they unproductive jobs that detract from economic growth at taxpayer expense?

While the biofuels industry is of course going to play up the angle that they’re the victims of well-monied interests like big oil, they can really quit acting as if they don’t have powerful political influences of their own. Farming-heavy states and agribusinesses have demonstrated a remarkable penchant for endorsing both liberal and ‘conservative’ politicians who manage to find ample justification for supporting agriculture-related handouts. Even Grist had a post yesterday acknowledging that ethanol is “beloved by farmers,” but obviously, farmers don’t love ethanol itself — they love ethanol subsidies.

What’s most interesting about the debate over the RFS and, specifically, the increase from E10 to E15 is the light it shines on the political process. Midwestern corn-producing states (and their elected officials) are happy about the mandate. Including more ethanol means buying more of the corn from which ethanol is made. Oil producers (and their elected officials) don’t like the increase. More ethanol means less gasoline; less gasoline means less money.

The Grist article also points out that a lot of greenie groups don’t like ethanol, either — the analyses of the environmental benefits versus the costs are highly dubious at best. So, remind me, why are we providing the biofuels industry with all of this “free money,” again? I say it’s time to cut ‘em loose.

Tags: , , , , , ,

Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

go get’em…

cmsinaz on May 23, 2013 at 8:05 PM

Among those officials: Jacob Sullivan, then deputy chief of staff and director of policy planning (and currently national security adviser to Vice President Joe Biden); Victoria Nuland, then State Department spokesman; Raymond Maxwell, deputy assistant secretary of state for near east affairs; Patrick Kennedy, undersecretary of state for management; and Eric Boswell, former assistant secretary of state for diplomatic security.

Boom.

peski on May 23, 2013 at 8:05 PM

hillary needs to come back as well….

cmsinaz on May 23, 2013 at 8:06 PM

I wonder if these whistleblowers are included.

PJM EXCLUSIVE: Ex-Diplomats Report New Benghazi Whistleblowers with Info Devastating to Clinton and Obama

…These whistleblowers, colleagues of the former diplomats, are currently securing legal counsel because they work in areas not fully protected by the Whistleblower law.

…The former diplomats inform PJM the new revelations concentrate in two areas — what Ambassador Chris Stevens was actually doing in Benghazi and the pressure put on General Carter Ham, then in command of U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) and therefore responsible for Libya, not to act to protect jeopardized U.S. personnel.

Stevens’ mission in Benghazi, they will say, was to buy back Stinger missiles from al-Qaeda groups issued to them by the State Department, not by the CIA. Such a mission would usually be a CIA effort, but the intelligence agency had opposed the idea because of the high risk involved in arming “insurgents” with powerful weapons that endanger civilian aircraft.

…Regarding General Ham, military contacts of the diplomats tell them that AFRICOM had Special Ops “assets in place that could have come to the aid of the Benghazi consulate immediately (not in six hours).”

Ham was told by the White House not to send the aid to the trapped men, but Ham decided to disobey and did so anyway, whereupon the White House “called his deputy and had the deputy threaten to relieve Ham of his command.”

INC on May 23, 2013 at 8:08 PM

President Obama on Thursday nominated Victoria Nuland, a State Department official involved in the editing of the administration’s talking points on Benghazi, to be the next assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs.

via politico

is he really that clueless????

cmsinaz on May 23, 2013 at 8:10 PM

As the investigation into the Obama administration’s handling of the attacks on U.S. facilities in Benghazi intensifies, lawmakers on Capitol Hill are seeking to conduct transcribed interviews with thirteen top State Department officials in the coming weeks in order to learn more.

I don’t know the details of a transcribed interview. Will they be under oath?

Curtiss on May 23, 2013 at 8:11 PM

is he really that clueless????

cmsinaz on May 23, 2013 at 8:10 PM

Arrogant and narcissistic. He may think he’s completely untouchable because for his entire political life, he’s pretty much done whatever he wanted to do and gotten away with it.

INC on May 23, 2013 at 8:12 PM

INC on May 23, 2013 at 8:12 PM

tru dat

cmsinaz on May 23, 2013 at 8:12 PM

So we’re coming up to hit about two full weeks of scandals?

Still more revelations every day as the stable doors burst open on this Augean Administration.

INC on May 23, 2013 at 8:14 PM

Nothing wrong with pandering to your ever decreasing base I guess.

HotAirLib on May 23, 2013 at 8:16 PM

i’m just gonna say it: Darell Issa is sexy!

GhoulAid on May 23, 2013 at 8:17 PM

Keeping up pressure is a fitting tribute for Memorial Day.

ajacksonian on May 23, 2013 at 8:17 PM

I have no confidence that Issa has what it takes to get to the truth of any of these scandals.

blue13326 on May 23, 2013 at 8:19 PM

President Obama on Thursday nominated Victoria Nuland, a State Department official involved in the editing of the administration’s talking points on Benghazi, to be the next assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs.
via politico

is he really that clueless????

cmsinaz on May 23, 2013 at 8:10 PM

Nothing wrong with pandering to your ever decreasing base I guess.

HotAirLib on May 23, 2013 at 8:16 PM

You are correct for once.

VegasRick on May 23, 2013 at 8:22 PM

Nothing wrong with pandering to your ever decreasing base I guess.

HotAirLib on May 23, 2013 at 8:16 PM

Fiat justitia et ruant coeli
Let justice be done, though the heavens fall.

INC on May 23, 2013 at 8:28 PM

Note to ERIKA JOHNSEN: the “womp” is missing.r Please pick up the blue courtesy phone in the lobby.

ExpressoBold on May 23, 2013 at 8:33 PM

HAL, Sing daisy for us.

Can’t handle your messiah failing huh?

The next few weeks should be fun, well for us not you. You’ll soon be curled up in the fetal potition sucking your thumb.

Tissue?

D-fusit on May 23, 2013 at 8:51 PM

hillary needs to come back as well….

cmsinaz on May 23, 2013 at 8:06 PM

Hillary will be back on her deathbed before she goes back to Congress. She wants to be President. She timed her last appearance (not under oath) so that it was just before her victory lap as the best SecState ever. She’s not going to willingly go back to Congress and have to answer the questions that the ARB should have asked if it were conducted by men of integrity instead of Mullen and Pickering.

Happy Nomad on May 23, 2013 at 8:52 PM

Nothing wrong with pandering to your ever decreasing base I guess.

HotAirLib on May 23, 2013 at 8:16 PM

Well, we’ll see how that works out for the rat-eared traitor. Fewer and fewer supporters everyday as the scandals take their toll. It is only a matter of time before Bo denies that he knows this filthy corrupt bastard (literally).

Happy Nomad on May 23, 2013 at 8:55 PM

Nothing wrong with pandering to your ever decreasing base I guess.

HotAirLib on May 23, 2013 at 8:16 PM

ZOMG!!11!! HAL has become a Republican! Thank goodness! I was in fear for your almost-immortal soul. (You still owe time to Satan, for your years of apostasy).

Um, what was that…? HAL attempted sarcasm? Well, butter my butt, and call me a biscuit! And they told me libbabies don’t have a sense of humor! Good, HAL, good. In a few years, you might be eligible to apply for human race membership.

Your Libbiebers are going down in flames, HAL. Enjoy the weenie roast.

creekspecter on May 23, 2013 at 9:36 PM

Nobody is in jail yet. One vacation, and one 3 week early retirement.

I like the line,, but results would be good.

IRS agents in a supermax general population.

wolly4321 on May 23, 2013 at 9:53 PM

There’s been some concern[-trolling] that Republicans might be pushing their luck with the extent to which they are focusing on Scandalmania and especially the ongoing Benghazi debacle, but a CNN poll earlier this week confirmed that a healthy majority of 59 percent of Americans approve of the way Republicans have been handling the investigation…

We’ve hit a point in this country where political gamesmanship should not be considered. Even if the poll were not favorable, this is the hill to die on–because if someone does not reign in this out-of-control administration, there will be no more hills. When one party ruthlessly and brazenly abuses the power of the public offices it controls to punish its political enemies, what follows–barring some sort of intervention and house cleaning–is tyranny.

It is truly terrifying how far along that path we have slipped. I shudder to think what will happen if the Republicans let these egregious wrongs–these assaults against everything America stands for–go. It’s heartening that 59% of Americans get that. (Of course, it would be great if the percentage were higher, but I’m willing, all things considered, to see that in a glass-a-bit-past-half-full kind of way.)

And when I consider how I would react if this were a Republican administration rather than a Democrat one, I feel exactly the same way. I would want the guilty parties identified, removed from office, and suitably punished. Either we are a people that believes in the rule of law, or we are a people willing to be subject to the capricious desires of whoever happens to hold the most power.

May God help us, and may justice be done–no matter what polls say.

butterflies and puppies on May 23, 2013 at 10:10 PM

are going to hold Secretary Kerry to his promise to run “an accountable and open State Department”:

Yeah? And what’s the ‘expiration date’ going to be on that “promise”?

GarandFan on May 23, 2013 at 10:24 PM

The backdrop for all this corruption is a media, an educational system, and an entertainment industry that all act as propagandists for one political party and one political ideology.

Imagine a theatre filled with an audience who have diverse political views. Yet the sound engineer, the lighting engineer, the actors, the musicians, the stage hands, the ushers, and the candy vendors all act in unison to promote one point of view.

This is the America that we live in today, and the GOP are to blame for sitting on their hands and allowing this situation to metastasize for the past 40 years, based on the idiot logic of “hey, we’re still winning our fair share of elections, so let’s stay above the fray”.

When the next Civil War begins, it can also be ended in one day. Just bomb the hell out of every college campus faculty lounge, every Hollywood studio, and the HQ of every MSM outlet, and then watch America slowly go back to normal.

Cut all three heads off of the snake.

ardenenoch on May 23, 2013 at 11:46 PM

Considering how dreadfully FEW were involved in last years elections I’m glad our remaining representatives are still taking their jobs seriously.

If more don’t start getting involved NOW I couldn’t blame them for letting these matters drop.

Let them eat cake, right?

DannoJyd on May 24, 2013 at 1:05 AM

…reign in…
butterflies and puppies on May 23, 2013 at 10:10 PM

Sorry–should be “rein in.” I’m going to blame it on a combination of tiredness, distraction, and the unsettling specter of a power-mad monarch looming over the future of this country. ;)

butterflies and puppies on May 24, 2013 at 1:37 AM

Nothing will happen for 11 days. Congress is adjourned for the Memorial DAY holiday. Only in govt will 1 holiday equal 11 days off.

Kissmygrits on May 24, 2013 at 8:49 AM

I would point out that by definition it extremely difficult to blackout the public and overwhelm them with information and talking about something at the same time.

I guess the Media’s take is that forcing the Media to say “move along nothing to see here”, enough times will irritate the public into voting against Republicans.

I think they also know the did the “move along nothing to see here thing” on Benghazi and they don’t wan’t other to understand how horribly wrong and biased they were to do that.

Personally I think that is really the media saying they don’t know if they can do those 2 things at the same time and so are hoping to steer everyone away from making them do this tightrope walk.

Conan on May 24, 2013 at 10:06 AM