It’s been over a decade Passed since Renewable fuel standard The 2007 energy bill was greatly expanded. The federal mandate requires 36 gallons of biofuel (primarily corn ethanol) to be mixed with American gasoline and diesel by 2022. The policy has been dominated for small petroleum refiners in recent news, with a history of damaging the fuel standard to a wide range of stakeholders including federal taxpayers. Joined a long list of Weird bedflow Taxpayers for Common Sense, including small engine manufacturers, consumer advocates, the food industry, anti-hunger groups, environmentalists and livestock groups, believe that the biofuel mandate has done more harm than good for most – except for one notable exception. , Excluding corn growers.
Unfortunately, there has been a recent debate in Washington Ignored most of these interested partiesInstead of focusing on the future of the standard, the fight between the oil and corn industries. The oil industry, representing “bound parties”, or required to follow the standard, indicates a high cost for a renewable identification number (a unique number is assigned to each gallon of biofuel produced, which is then purchased. Can be sold or traded) recent reason Bankruptcy Of Philadelphia Energy Solutions. As an independent merchant refiner, Philadelphia Energy Solutions purchases renewable identification numbers to meet fuel standard requirements rather than blending ethanol with gasoline.
Sen. Ted Cruz, a Republican opponent of both ethanol subsidies and a renewable fuel standard from the oil-rich state of Texas, confirmed the Undertakery of the U.S. Department of Agriculture for months until securing a White House meeting on the issue. Last week, Cruz and three other senators from the oil and corn states met with White House officials to try to compromise on some administrative reforms. Another meeting took place with the oil and biofuels industries, including representatives from two ethanol and biodiesel facilities, which have received at least $ 24 million in taxpayer subsidies from 2009-16 through the Department of Agriculture. Bioenergy Program for Advanced Biofuels. Attendees reportedly discussed capping identification number prices in exchange for a one-year discount Of E15, Or 15 percent ethanol (most gasoline is currently mixed with E10 – 10 percent ethanol). Sales of the Summertime E15 are prohibited due to ozone concerns – not to mention liability issues with the E10 – E15 and restrictions on its use in older vehicles and small engines.
The corn and ethanol industries have so far been reluctant to accept low renewable identification number costs for year-round E15 sales. University of Illinois The oil industry will benefit more than corn if these administrative changes are implemented in tandem. Iowa GOP Sen. Chuck Grassley indicated after last week’s meeting that participants agreed to study the economic impact analysis of these proposals.
The problem with this approach is that it considers only one sample of the negative effects of the renewable fuel standard. The oil and corn industries may be the most politically powerful interests related to this policy, but policymakers need to assess the full history of the standard, which expands on higher costs. poor, Taxpayers, Small engine Owners and consumers alike. In 2008, the former Texas Government. Rick perry (Now Secretary of Energy) requested that the Environmental Protection Agency meet the requirements of the renewable fuel standard due to high food prices (as most biofuels are produced from food-based feedstock such as corn and soybeans). In 2012, Perry and 10 other governors Divers requested the corn ethanol mandate given the historic US drought and its impact on record corn prices. And earlier this year, Democratic Village. Carney of Delaware In its own and other states requested a renewable fuel standard exemption due to higher costs for refiners.
For many years, my organization has worked closely with broad stakeholders, from oil refiners, to grocers, conservationists, anti-poverty policy victories and more, to work for everyone. Policy makers need to engage a wide range of stakeholders to adopt the same approach and fully assess the policy failures and the most promising opportunities for improvement over the past decade. Only then a comprehensive solution can be found.