On Taxing Pixie Dust and Unicorn Farts
21st June 2012
In 2011, Congressional mandates for Cellulosic Biofuel cost refiners $6.8 million (New York Times story). In 2012, the mandated use of Cellulosic Biofuel is 8.6 million gallons.
The projected commercial availability of Cellulosic Biofuel for 2012 is 0.0 gallons.
Blenders must use their mandated quantity of Cellulosic Biofuel, or pay “offsets”, essentially a tax the EPA charges for failure to use the nonexistent product. Of course, refiners are not going to absorb this cost, they’ll merely pass it on to the consumer. (Two industry groups have joined in a lawsuit against the EPA and its absurd penalties.)
June 21st, 2012 at 05:44
What the hell is Cellulosic Biofuel?
Whatever it is, one might wonder why the refiners and blenders don’t just start making the stuff instead of sitting on their thumbs wailing about not being able to buy it from someone else. Could it be that they don’t think it’s that big a deal?
After all, Exxon Mobil–one oil company, albeit the largest–reported $41 billion in net profit in 2011. In light of that, $6.8 million doesn’t even make a pimple on the industry’s ass. They probably spend more than that for paper clips and tape.
June 21st, 2012 at 11:05
Cellulosic biofuel is made from cellulose. The technology just simply doesn’t exist as yet. The technology to make biodiesel from waste oils and organic oils (e.g., olive oil) not only exists but is pretty simple and is widely marketed or mixed in conventional diesel. The Left has a huge issue (that I don’t even pretend to understand)about using using crop oils for fuel. To make it even more confusing, they don’t seem to have the same issue with using ethanol from corn for a gasoline additive.
So what’s the big deal with fining Big Oil for not doing something they can’t do anyway? Because it’s not a fine on them, it’s a fine on the consumers. We are effectively paying EPA to pretend to be driving new technology.
June 21st, 2012 at 11:56
Well then, that’s just dumber than a bag of hammers. I have no particular ax to grind regarding the EPA, but this is one of those issues where ‘stupid is as stupid does’.
On a related note, what is the big obstacle to using methanol instead of ethanol as an additive? Is it less explosive? Harder to distill? More expensive? What?
June 21st, 2012 at 14:15
It’s not made from corn. Seriously. The only reason ethanol is added to gasoline is to make sure senators and congressmen from corn growing states get farm votes and cash from ADM.
June 21st, 2012 at 14:26
So then would methanol be considered a Cellulosic Biofuel?
June 22nd, 2012 at 00:02
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Cellulosic+Biofuel
June 22nd, 2012 at 00:03
Here’s the original article from that hotbed of conservative drivel, the New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/10/business/energy-environment/companies-face-fines-for-not-using-unavailable-biofuel.html