• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ethanol Subsidies May Be Coming To An End

DontDoIt

Active member
Joined
Jan 18, 2011
Messages
391
Reaction score
72
Location
Illinois, Land of Liberals
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Good they need to end, ethanol is a big ruse on the american people...HOWEVER, having said that recently big oil execs whined to congress that it not fair to take their HUGE subisidies and not others...and of course the teaparty gop agreed wholeheartedly and voted down ending them....how is ethanol subsidies any different and if we end those shouldnt big oils subsidies end too
 
Good they need to end, ethanol is a big ruse on the american people...HOWEVER, having said that recently big oil execs whined to congress that it not fair to take their HUGE subisidies and not others...and of course the teaparty gop agreed wholeheartedly and voted down ending them....how is ethanol subsidies any different and if we end those shouldnt big oils subsidies end too
Indeed oil should be ended too, if anything theirs should have been ended long ago and before ethanol. Im guessing they are subsidized much more than ethanol is as well?
 
I'd like to see the end of subsidies. Encouraging farmers to grow fuel instead of food has always seemed a bad policy to me. Especially the effect of it at the grocery market.
 
Good they need to end, ethanol is a big ruse on the american people...HOWEVER, having said that recently big oil execs whined to congress that it not fair to take their HUGE subisidies and not others...and of course the teaparty gop agreed wholeheartedly and voted down ending them....how is ethanol subsidies any different and if we end those shouldnt big oils subsidies end too

I couldn't have said it better myself.

The argument in ending ethanol subsidies isn't that it's an unproven industry, but rather that it has been profitable and can continue being profitable on its own. If that's the case, why are we continuing the subsidies for big oil when they've shown they can earn big profits for years!?!
 
Variable dial pumps---the guy at the pump decides how much ethanol he wants and how it impacts his cost at the pump. Let the consumer decide, I suspect we will see local support for ethanol in farming communities and not so much in the metros. It will create an additional cost onto local stations as they will need holding tanks for just ethanol as well as new pumps to support the mixing, but...gas stations are some giant revenue streams, let me tell ya.

Objective Voice, thanks for the disinformation, Ethanol gets the same tax breaks Oil gets and gets money directly from the government on top of that. Every company gets tax write offs for R&D and Capital Amortization, not just oil.
 
Variable dial pumps---the guy at the pump decides how much ethanol he wants and how it impacts his cost at the pump. Let the consumer decide, I suspect we will see local support for ethanol in farming communities and not so much in the metros. It will create an additional cost onto local stations as they will need holding tanks for just ethanol as well as new pumps to support the mixing, but...gas stations are some giant revenue streams, let me tell ya.

Objective Voice, thanks for the disinformation, Ethanol gets the same tax breaks Oil gets and gets money directly from the government on top of that. Every company gets tax write offs for R&D and Capital Amortization, not just oil.

Interesting idea. But ethanol over I believe about 15% requires substantial modification to both the the physical fuel system (lines seals etc) as well as the engine management systems. "Flex fuel" vehicles like Fords have a sensor that adjusts amount of fuel delivered, ignition curves etc, but as far as I know no manufacturer sells any stock vehicles capable of running on "any" mix of gas/ethanol. And don't forget, a gallon of ethanol won't take you as far as a gallon of gas.

Turning food into fuel is causing issues with global fuel supplies as well.

Until we get green waste alcohols going we need to keep ethanol as an oxygenate and not a fuel, imho.
 
Analysis: Ethanol grown up, will withstand subsidy loss | Reuters
Farmers worried about ethanol subsidy cuts - CBS News

Well most conservatives would see this as a major victory, but as a conservative corn producing farmer this one may end up hurting us. Although corn has been skyrocketing and E-85 has been a let down in terms of success, it leaves a bittersweet taste, although the article talks of a possible compromise which would be suitable.

Thoughts?

Not getting the hand out might be a bit of a shock for a time but the market for corn will never go away and there will be more and cheaper for people and as a feed crop which could have a positive affect on some food prices and that is a good thing.
 
Any business that can operate with a profit should NOT be getting a subsidy. Any business that CANNOT operate with a profit is not viable and should NOT be getting a subsidy. Pretty basic stuff.
 
Good and while we're at it, how about killing ALL state subsidies. They're nothing but stolen money from the tax payers given to prop up industries, a business should be able to stand up on it's own two feet.
 
Analysis: Ethanol grown up, will withstand subsidy loss | Reuters
Farmers worried about ethanol subsidy cuts - CBS News

Well most conservatives would see this as a major victory, but as a conservative corn producing farmer this one may end up hurting us. Although corn has been skyrocketing and E-85 has been a let down in terms of success, it leaves a bittersweet taste, although the article talks of a possible compromise which would be suitable.

Thoughts?

Food or fuel, take your pick. But all subsidies like this should end.
 
Any business that can operate with a profit should NOT be getting a subsidy. Any business that CANNOT operate with a profit is not viable and should NOT be getting a subsidy. Pretty basic stuff.

For the most part I agree with that. However, I can support the government encouraging research into some speculative developments that could end up of great benefit to the country. Especially in times like these when
venture capital is tight. Or it would appear to be tight.

At one time, farmers needed encouragement to grow corn for ethanol to our benefit. That time has long since past though and the subsidies should have been eliminated long ago.
 
For the most part I agree with that. However, I can support the government encouraging research into some speculative developments that could end up of great benefit to the country. Especially in times like these when
venture capital is tight. Or it would appear to be tight.

At one time, farmers needed encouragement to grow corn for ethanol to our benefit. That time has long since past though and the subsidies should have been eliminated long ago.

I can see the venture capital idea. the problem with that is I have worked with several gov contractors that get that venture capital and sell 'ideas.' They usually have 5-7 years to produce some sort of result and at the end of that time period what they demonstrate is either viable or trashed and off to the next venture. they make gazillions off theory. Needs to be some way to scale it back and get better results.
 
If you're talking from profitablilty standpoint fuel without a doubt.

They're free to pursue that venue without a single dime from the tax payers.
 
I can see the venture capital idea. the problem with that is I have worked with several gov contractors that get that venture capital and sell 'ideas.' They usually have 5-7 years to produce some sort of result and at the end of that time period what they demonstrate is either viable or trashed and off to the next venture. they make gazillions off theory. Needs to be some way to scale it back and get better results.

Oh yes. There certainly is more than enough room to make changes n order to obtain better results. We've all heard stories of abuse. Better peer review of grant/subsidy proposals when they are initiated?
 
Oh yes. There certainly is more than enough room to make changes n order to obtain better results. We've all heard stories of abuse. Better peer review of grant/subsidy proposals when they are initiated?

GAg! Not 'peer' reviewed!!! Id rather see a panel of consumers and taxpayers that are more than willing to throw the bull**** flag when needed than a bunch of like-minded biased 'peers.' Those peers eventually want something in return.

Sorry...Ive worked with too many university based research programs to have much faith in...welll...university based research programs.

(and I AGREE with your post...just not the peer reviewed part)
 
Variable dial pumps---the guy at the pump decides how much ethanol he wants and how it impacts his cost at the pump. Let the consumer decide, I suspect we will see local support for ethanol in farming communities and not so much in the metros. It will create an additional cost onto local stations as they will need holding tanks for just ethanol as well as new pumps to support the mixing, but...gas stations are some giant revenue streams, let me tell ya.

Objective Voice, thanks for the disinformation, Ethanol gets the same tax breaks Oil gets and gets money directly from the government on top of that. Every company gets tax write offs for R&D and Capital Amortization, not just oil.

Ethanol is not a viable replacement in any way, shape, or form.

1) You have to plant the corn. Get on your tractor and use oil based fuel.

2) You have to harvest the corn. Get on your tractor and use oil based fuel.

3) You have to take the corn to the distillery. Get some trucks and use oil based fuel.

4) You have take the ethanol from the distillery to the refinery. Get some tanker trucks and use oil based fuel.

5) And, of course, you have to transport gasoline with ethanal in it to market. More tanker trucks, which use oil based fuel.

In the end, producing ethanol uses more energy than it produces. Add to that the cost of the corn, paying employees to transport corn and ethanol, fertilizer, and other items, ethanol is a total waste of time and money. But total waste of time and money is something you would expect from our idiots in Washington. Producing more fuel efficient vehicles, going green, the Pickens Plan, solar, conservation, and other realistic programs, will end up weaning us off Middle Eastern oil, whereas ethanol only benefits corporate farms, along with the politicians who recieve the campaign donations (bribes) to keep this idiotic program going.
 
GAg! Not 'peer' reviewed!!! Id rather see a panel of consumers and taxpayers that are more than willing to throw the bull**** flag when needed than a bunch of like-minded biased 'peers.' Those peers eventually want something in return.

Sorry...Ive worked with too many university based research programs to have much faith in...welll...university based research programs.

(and I AGREE with your post...just not the peer reviewed part)

I see your point. Consumers and taxpayers would be skeptical enough to ask hard questions. I would still want one peer, so that a smooth talking researcher/corporate guy, couldn't pull the wool over their eyes with promises that have no scientific or practical basis.
 
what about the rest of em?
 
Ethanol is not a viable replacement in any way, shape, or form

Not quite Dana, Corn ethanol is not a viable replacement in any way, shape, or form. Sugar is another story entirely. It's pathetic that American corn ethanol producers cannot even compete with Brazilian sugar ethanol despite subsidies and stiff tariffs.
 
They're free to pursue that venue without a single dime from the tax payers.
What I'm talking about must be different from what you are because farmers profiting from fuel rather than food has not a single thing to do with taxpayer money
 
Back
Top Bottom