Subsidies and Mandates for Biofuel Don’t Provide Enough Stability?

- by Nico­las Loris, May 16, 2014, Source: The Foundry

With the Sen­ate con­sid­er­ing extend­ing a pack­age of tax cred­its that expired at the end of 2013, six Sen­a­tors have band­ed togeth­er to call on Con­gress to re-up the expired bio­fu­el credits.

In par­tic­u­lar, tax cred­its of $1 per gal­lon pro­duced was offered for blend­ed diesel made with agri­cul­tur­al prod­ucts. Appar­ent­ly, decades of hand­outs worth bil­lions of dol­lars, a fed­er­al man­date for bio­fu­el pro­duc­tion, and numer­ous state “incen­tives” just aren’t enough sta­bil­i­ty for those feed­ing from the trough filled with tax­pay­ers’ money.

The Sen­a­tors point­ed to a drop in biodiesel pro­duc­tion in 2014 as evi­dence of the need for con­tin­ued gov­ern­ment sup­port. Biodiesel pro­duc­tion in Jan­u­ary 2014 was 65 mil­lion gal­lons low­er than Decem­ber 2013. That’s because bio­fu­el pro­duc­ers are gorg­ing on tax­pay­ers’ mon­ey to over­sup­ply the market.

And the tax cred­it is only a part of how the gov­ern­ment sup­ports bio­fu­el pro­duc­tion. Con­gress man­dat­ed pro­duc­tion of bio­fu­els in the 2005 Ener­gy Pol­i­cy Act, and the Ener­gy Inde­pen­dence and Secu­ri­ty Act of 2007 amped up the pro­duc­tion quo­tas to 36 bil­lion gal­lons by 2022, includ­ing biodiesel.

If that weren’t enough, most states pro­vide tax cred­its, loans, grants, and reg­u­la­tions for renew­able fuel pro­duc­tion. For instance, Sen­a­tor Al Franken (D–MN), one of the Mem­bers pitch­ing for bio­fu­el sta­bil­i­ty, has a laun­dry list of incen­tives, laws, and reg­u­la­tions in his home state, but appar­ent­ly he needs the fed­er­al tax­pay­er to pitch in even more.

Remov­ing the fed­er­al government’s pref­er­en­tial treat­ment doesn’t spell the end of the indus­try. It would remove the uncom­pet­i­tive ele­ments of the indus­try and free up the resources not depen­dent on the tax­pay­er to be more valu­able else­where in the econ­o­my. Prob­lems of insta­bil­i­ty come from an inabil­i­ty to com­pete in the mar­ket, not from extend­ing a tax cred­it they knew was set to expire.

Dis­plac­ing oil with ethanol in the gaso­line mar­ket may be reduc­ing Amer­i­cans’ depen­dence on oil, but it’s a very small reduc­tion at a very high cost. In 2011, bio­fu­els account­ed for only 4 per­cent of the trans­porta­tion fuel used in the Unit­ed States, and because ethanol is less ener­gy-dense, the dis­place­ment of oil is even less than that. Even this small share of the mar­ket is also due to strong polit­i­cal effort—a fed­er­al man­date and bil­lions of dol­lars in tax­pay­er sup­port.

We don’t know if bio­fu­els are an Amer­i­can suc­cess sto­ry, because bio­fu­els haven’t com­pet­ed in a free mar­ket. But it is clear that the pol­i­cy is a com­plete and utter fail­ure that ben­e­fits a select group of spe­cial inter­ests at the expense Amer­i­can tax­pay­ers and fuel consumers.


Posted

in

by


EJ Communities Map

Map of Coal and Gas Facilities

We are mapping all of the existing, proposed, closed and defeated dirty energy and waste facilities in the US. We are building a network of community groups to fight the facilities and the corporations behind them.

Our Network

Watch Us on YouTube