kcfoxie wrote:
Cowpie1 wrote:
Keep in mind that we are competing with Europe on this one. A large portion of biodiesel production is going to Europe. All in all, we are getting hosed. The Government uses OUR money to subsidize biodiesel production and then the producers move most of it to Europe where they can get a better price. That keeps our costs for biodiesel up so that we are paying twice for the product.
Life is good!
You have a misconception. There are
NO subsidies for biodiesel
producers, only a credit for petroleum industry refineries that are
blending the purchased at wholesale price biodiesel into the petorleum product to reduce the CO2 output of their fuel.
Believe me, I work closely with one of Europe's newest suppliers. They sold out to them to keep in the game, because the government only offers a few grants (which are hard to get) and no constant subsidies for producers of biodiesel, but they make it worth the petrol industries' time and effort to blend the bio product into their own product with the $1/gallon credits.
If you wish to speak to someone fluent in this issue, I can give you Lyle Estill's email address. He is the founder of Piedmont Biofuels in North Carolina, the second largest biodiesel co-op in the united states (possibly now the largest with the membership growth we've had since the fuel dropped to 80 cents cheaper per gallon than petroleum).[/i]
Not being seemingly as knowledgable as you on the subject, I will not contest about subsidies to producers. But VERY knowledgable on the Ag side of things, There are PLENTY of subisdies that are paid for by our taxes to the growers. Along with the cost to us for the Department of Agriculture and other agencies that direct the agriculture industry which in turn affects the markets. And now that biofuels are the "in" thing, we as nation will, for the first time in our history, have to import wheat due to the lack of production in the U.S. since there is a major shift to planting mostly corn and soybeans. Again, increasing the cost to the consumer. Also, alfalfa prices have more than doubled due to the decrease in acres being used for that. A small bale went for about $2 a few years ago, now, a second or third cutting bale goes for almost $5.
No matter how you look at it, the tax payers are subsidizing some portions of the whole process, either in direct taxation or unintended consequences. Else, biofuels would not have gotten as far as they have. At the state level, there are subsidies in the form of tax credits and such that influence the building of new production facilities. I watch this kind of crap go on daily here in Iowa. Not knowledgeable about the S.E. part of the country. Also, government mandates regarding inclusion of biofuels in all pumps affects the cost, including costing all of us for the beaurocracy involved and increasing the costs of other goods as mentioned in the last paragraph.
Not as rosey a picture as it appears on the surface. I realize that you could direct me to a biofuel producer, but I in turn would direct you to the Farm Bureau for more details on a broader scale than just the final biofuel production.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
When they squeeze the oil out of oil seed stocks the solids that are left over are processed into animal feed as are the left over solids from Ethanol production. Often these leftover solids have more protein and other nutrients than the original seed stocks themselves. Since they are, " Processed and Fortified with minerals, vitamins, amino acids and other stuff" these left overs are sold for more money than the original crops used to generate them. What is the added benefit to us besides Biofuel? The animals are healthier, produce more and are less likely to require the use of antibiotics or other medications to get well.