The Daily Caller is reporting some outcomes associated with those promises:
- Promise: The production of cellulosic ethanol (made from non-edible plant material) would match projected use.
Outcome: Unfortunately, the use of cellulosic ethanol has been largely unsuccessful.
- Promise: Corn producers could produce plenty of corn-ethanol.
Outcome: Unfortunately, even though corn produces have been successful in this regard, the low energy content in each gallon makes corn-ethanol unattractive in the marketplace. Why? Refiners cannot legally add any more ethanol to E10 gasoline (10% ethanol, 90% gasoline), as it can only contain up to 10% ethanol. Without selling the 85% ethanol blend (E85, that's 85% ethanol, 15% gasoline) below what it costs to produce the blend, refiners can't get consumers to buy it.
That's all bad enough. Worse yet are two outcomes associated with this dogma of those who worship at the altar of environmentalism that's yet to unfold for the average driver. Again, the Daily Caller reports:
- The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has estimated that RFS will cause gasoline prices to increase an additional 13 to 26 cents/gallon by 2017. So, for a 20-gallon fill up, that's an additional $5.20.
- To meet RFS consumption targets, the CBO estimates that refiners will have to lower the price of E85 by as much as $1.27/gallon to encourage sales. To do this, they will have to raise the price of their lower-ethanol content gasoline. So, for a 20-gallon fill up, that's going to be an additional $25.40.
As bad as all that is and insofar as The Motley Monk is concerned, what's absolutely criminal about this dogma that the stormy petrils got legislated is that because ~40% of corn grown in the United States is subsidized by the federal government to produce ethanol not food, commodity prices as well as food prices have increased. That might not bother many people, but it has caused a grave social injustice: In the end, the legislation has caused the poor to suffer as their income now purchases less food. Of course, this explains in part why under President Obama the federal government has spent 70% more on food stamps (the Supplemental Nourishment Assistance Plan or "SNAP").
This is how radical liberal economic policies work. For the good of "protecting the environment"--something that liberals, moderates, and conservatives all approve of--those who worship at the altar of environmentalism send their stormy petrils to Washington, DC, with the mission of getting their untested dogma legislated. In this instance, here's what happens when they're successful:
- gasoline prices increase;
- commodity prices increase; and,
- food prices increase.
The outcome? Little benefit to the environment, a President who claims he didn't raise taxes on working Americans, and increased federal debt. All of this translates into middle- and lower- income Americans growing poorer and their standard of living decreasing year by year.
Whatever became of that strict wall" of separation that dogmatic liberals like those who worship at the altar of environmentalism cherish so much?
Let the discussion begin...
To read the Daily Signal article, click on the following link:
"This Standard in One Reason the Price of Gas Will Increase."