Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    11:26 AM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: All Things Ethanol > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: Idea of the Day: Big Oil Doesn’t Need Special Tax Breaks Back to Topics
gamechanger2011

Champion Author
Wichita

Posts:1,894
Points:72,590
Joined:Jun 2011
Message Posted: Aug 5, 2013 7:01:29 PM


"It’s been quite a week for Big Oil. The big five oil companies—BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil, and Shell—reported their second-quarter 2013 profits this week, which were a combined $19.5 billion. That comes out to $145,000 in profit per minute—more than 88 percent of American households earn in an entire year. Despite these large amounts, however, the profits are still lower than analysts’ expectations and less than the second-quarter 2012 profits. This is partly due to lower gasoline prices in the second quarter of 2013 compared to the second quarter of 2012, as tabulated by the Energy Information Administration. Nonetheless, the $47.4 billion in 2013 profits so far is reason enough to end special tax breaks."
Idea of the Day: Big Oil Doesn’t Need Special Tax Breaks
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,284
Points:1,330,280
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Aug 8, 2013 3:05:33 PM

Happy 100th anniversary to oil tax subsidies, long-lived Big Oil welfare.
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,284
Points:1,330,280
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Aug 8, 2013 3:02:53 PM

Shockjock1961 wrote: "No it is accurate. 40%+ of the harvested corn crop was used to make a very tiny fraction of the liquid fuel that we use..."

Wrong, over 40% of the harvested corn is used to create animal feed, while also producing some superior, to gasoline, fuel as well as some corn oil.
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,284
Points:1,330,280
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Aug 8, 2013 2:58:45 PM

Shockjock1961 wrote: "Oil products have never had a "privileged monopoly". What laws granted the oil industry exclusive rights to sell fuel in this country?"

Sure they had, 13-year old prohibition.
Profile Pic
gamechanger2011
Champion Author Wichita

Posts:1,894
Points:72,590
Joined:Jun 2011
Message Posted: Aug 8, 2013 1:54:38 PM

Darwinfinch....I am convinced that Shocky is here only to agitate and to hijack threads. The sooner that you click your "ignore" button the better. If I were you I wouldn't waste time responding to him or reading his posts. You are just doing what he wants you to do. I learned this a couple of years ago. I give him NO credibility!
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,737
Points:2,783,765
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Aug 8, 2013 12:53:12 PM

"I'm bored with your inability to grasp the fundamentals"

It's more likely you are frustrated at being unable to counter my points or answer my simple qustions...
Profile Pic
darwinfinch
Veteran Author Gasbuddy

Posts:457
Points:6,860
Joined:May 2013
Message Posted: Aug 8, 2013 12:33:33 PM

I'm bored with your inability to grasp the fundamentals. Your stubborn defense of the 40% statistic is enough to convince me you are only here to rehash a list of talking-point myths.

Please come back to this forum in 10 years and read your comments. You will possibly LOL yourself to death.
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,737
Points:2,783,765
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Aug 8, 2013 12:24:52 PM

"You claimed that the existence of a law implies that most people disagree with the law"

No, I claimed the law exists to force people to buy an uncompetitive product, a completely different concept..

"Your misuse of this statistic is deliberate."

No it is accurate. 40%+ of the harvested corn crop was used to make a very tiny fraction of the liquid fuel that we use...

>>"Oil products have never had a 'privileged monopoly'.

LOL<<

I'm still waiting for you to show us the laws that granted the oil industry exclusive rights to sell fuel in this country, the definition of a privileged monopoly ...
Laughing doesn't answer the question, it just demonstrates you don't have an answer...

"Newsflash: Everything has increased in price"

Hmmm... That wasn't your answer concerning the increasing price of gasoline...

"Most Americans want clean-burning renewable fuel"

That doesn't mean they support the RFS. BTW, still waiting for that study that shows that 75% of Americans support ethanol...


[Edited by: Shockjock1961 at 8/8/2013 12:28:20 PM EST]
Profile Pic
darwinfinch
Veteran Author Gasbuddy

Posts:457
Points:6,860
Joined:May 2013
Message Posted: Aug 8, 2013 8:50:37 AM

"Non-Sequitur"

Not so. The analogy is accurate. You claimed that the existence of a law implies that most people disagree with the law. My analogy makes it clear that this is not a given.

"in regards to ethanol production 40%+ of the crop was consumed"

...and over half of that material is returned to the animal feed market as distillers grains, the #1 animal feed in America. Your misuse of this statistic is deliberate. Your intent is to indicate that only 60% of corn is available for food and feed, which is not accurate. The real number is 84%.

"Oil products have never had a 'privileged monopoly'."

LOL

"Pork, and chicken prices are increasing and Beef is at a record high"

Newsflash: Everything has increased in price. How fast though? Food prices continue to rise SLOWER than anything else, which means relative to inflation and other costs of living, food is actually getting cheaper. PS, Tyson Foods (chicken) made record profits last quarter.

"Most Americans have no choice when it comes to the gas they buy."

Most Americans want clean-burning renewable fuel, and have been granted that opportunity by the RFS. The group of people who want "clear" fuel (LOL) is remarkably small, and if they need it for their obsolete machinery, they can find it. They are extremely vocal and their voices are amplified by the API, but they are not "most" Americans.
Profile Pic
brerrabbitTX
Champion Author Houston

Posts:1,404
Points:24,925
Joined:Mar 2011
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2013 9:56:34 PM

"I like how you ripped Hannie a new butthole over using a single state example to make a point about ethanol preference, and then did the exact same thing."

I am not ripping anyone any new bodily orfices. I am challenging an assertion made by Hannie along with others who continually throw out the statement that 75% of Americas prefer, or want renewable fuels. At this point you say it's a single state. I actually gave two state examples. I do not have the time or inclination but could give you the same examples from almost every state in the union except for Alaska. They still use clear gas. People here continually say that fuel buyers have a choice to buy ethanol free gas, but that is simply not true. Can you drive great distances in several states to acquire ethanol free gas there is a simple reality that is price and economics that do in fact present limitations such that they really do have no choice. In the states where they don't have to drive as much the only clear fuel they can get is premium. That is not a choice.

Everyone here constantly says the truth needs to be heard, well when it comes to fuel choice I have presented the truth. Most Americans have no choice when it comes to the gas they buy.



[Edited by: brerrabbitTX at 8/7/2013 9:57:49 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Wanda127
Champion Author Florida

Posts:4,975
Points:1,513,345
Joined:May 2010
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2013 7:00:38 PM

They definitely should end their Tax Breaks especially since they are charging us so much for fuel.
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,737
Points:2,783,765
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2013 6:00:45 PM

"Corn prices are down, yet oil and food prices continue to rise"

Corn prices are down from a few weeks ago, but they are 2-3 times the price they were just 5 to 6 years ago...

" The price increaes in food is UNDER national inflation rates. Hmmmmmmm. There are 11 cents of corn in Corn Flakes, etc. etc."

Pork, and chicken prices are increasing and Beef is at a record high (you know, those critters who eat the corn whos prices have been so high lately due to ethanol consumption?)...
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,737
Points:2,783,765
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2013 5:54:08 PM

"35-40% of corn was processed by biorefineries"

Actually it was 40%+, and sorry you can't make ethanol out of DDGS, so in regards to ethanol production 40%+ of the crop was consumed...

"Yes you do, if another product holds a privileged monopoly over the marketplace."

Oil products have never had a "privileged monopoly". What laws granted the oil industry exclusive rights to sell fuel in this country?

[Edited by: Shockjock1961 at 8/7/2013 5:56:47 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,737
Points:2,783,765
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2013 5:52:06 PM

"Just because you like to rape people, and there's a law against raping people, doesn't mean that everyone else is a rapist."

Non-Sequitur

In the case of ethanol, it's a matter of the pro-ethanol shills and producers are the ones who like to rape people and so they get a law passed forcing everyone else in the country to periodically rape others...
Profile Pic
darwinfinch
Veteran Author Gasbuddy

Posts:457
Points:6,860
Joined:May 2013
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2013 5:51:05 PM

I like how you ripped Hannie a new butthole over using a single state example to make a point about ethanol preference, and then did the exact same thing.
Profile Pic
brerrabbitTX
Champion Author Houston

Posts:1,404
Points:24,925
Joined:Mar 2011
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2013 5:42:07 PM

A real world lesson

91 RVP>7.8 CONV ETHER DEMIN B 3.4132
93 RVP>7.8 CONV ETOH 3.5-4.0 B 3.2569In Nebraska today this is the posted price for premium fuel.

91 clear without ethanol is 3.4132 a gallon.
93 w/ 10% ethanol is 3.2569 a gallon

10% ethanol blended premium is 15.63 cents a gallon cheaper at the wholesale level. Now if you are a dealer buying premium at a terminal in Nebraska today which would you buy? Put aside your ethanol bias for a moment and think about it.

Once that gas gets to a station as a consumer which one would you buy if you were buying premium? The cheaper one yeah? Then take into consideration that the reason the ethanol blended one is cheaper because the one without ethanol does not generate a RIN credit. The full value of the RIN credit is being passed through to the dealer. The oil company posting this price keeps 0 value of the RIN credit, he gives it all up and thus give e-10 a 15 cent advantage. Now ask the average consumer if he is buyin e-10 because of the ethanol in the gas, or the price on the pump. My company does those surveys and I can tell you that 90% of the response we get are they do it because of the price.

MUL 89 RVP>7.8 CONV ETOH 3.5-4.0 B 2.8459
RUL 87 RVP>7.8 CONV ETHER 0-2.7 B 2.9832

Now how about regular gas? This is the posting from the same area as the first. 13.73 cents a gallon cheaper for 89 with ethanol than for 87 with no ethanol. What is interesting about this is that even in Nebraska the heart of the corn belt 27 to 28% of gas buyers in that state as well as in Iowa, Kansas, and South Dakota still pay up to buy the 87 octane gas with no ethanol.

This is not a survey! This is not antedotal information, this is real world data from a company that is in that market day in day out selling fuel and dealing with consumers and the gas buying public. And across the fueling industry this data is consistant across the board.

Given my knowledge that this is the real world data, this is why at times I question the ethanol folks on this board about their information that 75% of Amricans want renewable fuels. From what I see people want cheaper fuel and even then in at least four states smack dab in the middle of corn growing country 27 to 28% of the gas buyers want gas with no ethanol even if it means paying 14 cents a gallon or more.

So when I question some of your posts I do it because what you say does not even begin to align with the reality I deal with every day of my life. I understand you will say it's big oil and their lies, but come on, the middle of the corn belt and there is still a strong core of people that don't want ethanol? They have to see tons more ads and articles promoting ethanol than ads putting it down.
Profile Pic
darwinfinch
Veteran Author Gasbuddy

Posts:457
Points:6,860
Joined:May 2013
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2013 5:17:42 PM

"The existence of law implies that people don't want to use ethanol."

It really bothers me that this is taken for truth so easily.

Just because you like to rape people, and there's a law against raping people, doesn't mean that everyone else is a rapist. Consider the possibility that it's only a mandate for you, and that for everyone else it's a convenient boundary enforced on their behalf.

In other words, if you don't like something for which there is a law, and most people agree with the law, then you should consider your relationship with that something.
Profile Pic
GrumpyCat
Champion Author Alabama

Posts:5,392
Points:1,269,585
Joined:Jun 2009
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2013 5:09:24 PM

"No, the existence of law implies that people don't want to use ethanol. After all you don't have to have a law forcing people to use a product if they are already willing too..."

Ditto.

75% want renewable fuels? What was the exact wording used in that survey? Who doesn't want renewable fuels? Its a silly question. A serious question is, "How much extra will you pay?" And "Why didn't you use the E85 pump?"

I once took an informal survey asking if one would "beam up" to the Enterprise right now if offered? 99% said, "Heck yeah!" Then I asked if they would mind having their original body destroyed, a copy made elsewhere, and was answered with incredulity. Think about it. Only Dr. McCoy thought about it.
Profile Pic
brerrabbitTX
Champion Author Houston

Posts:1,404
Points:24,925
Joined:Mar 2011
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2013 4:01:13 PM

I don't agree with shockjock on everything by any means. But at times in between all the rhetoric he does make a point. And in this case what you are saying dovetails in perfectly with the survey so often quoted around here about 75% of Americans want renewable fuels.

I have given this example before and will give it again even though I get slammed for it.

I live in the Houston, Texas area and it is a mandated region per the EPA. Retailers cannot sell gas without ethanol in it. Now does that mean I cannot buy ethanol free gas? No, I can drive about 120 miles in any direction except towards the Gulf of Mexico and buy ethanol free gas. No problem for me as ethanol in my gas does not bother me at all. But if I was violently opposed to ethanol in my gas I guess I would do it. But for all practical purposes for 90% of the people in the area living on a budget it makes absolutely no sense to drive 240 mile round trip for ethanol free gas. So essentially for 90% of the population they are economically priced out of the clear fuel market. They are making an economic choice, not a choice to burn ethanol.

Specifically because of my market knowledge of Wisconsin and what is available at the wholesale level I can tell you that the only ethanol free gas available in the state is basically premium 91 octane. The main reason it is there is because a segment of the market has demanded it. That segment is boaters, and snowmobilers. They want ethanol free gas and made a stink to get it.

The same thing happened in Florida. The boat owners association of Florida filed a class action lawsuit against the wholesale fuel sellers in the state because as a group they wanted to convert the entire state to e-10. There were several people I work with that had to be deposed and a couple even had to testify in court. At the end of the day what came of it was wholesalers offering a 90 octane clear fuel with no ethanol. Basically it is premium they use that becomes 92 or 93 octane premium after you put ethanol in it. Imagine that oil companies wanting to sell only e-10 and losing a court case that made them sell ethanol free gas.

So while clear ethanol free fuel may be available in places if it is only premium as it is in Wisconsin and Florida then saying people choose e-10 over clear because there is ethanol in the gas is a little disingenuine. They are making the decision for economic reasons, like the price, not because of the ethanol.



[Edited by: brerrabbitTX at 8/7/2013 4:04:42 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Hannie59
All-Star Author Appleton

Posts:964
Points:24,300
Joined:Apr 2010
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2013 3:38:59 PM

Come on brer, don't try to obscure the fact that Shockjock1961 has claimed on hundreds of occasions that people are forced to use ethanol, when they are CHOOSING it. They are NOT forced to do anyhing in most cases. Every station I know of has non ethanol gas, while very FEW have E-85.

The vast majority of times they put E-10 in their vehicle they are choosing to do so. Every time they put E-85 they are choosing to do so. And help break a putrid monopoly in the process. And every time they put E-0 in they are choosing to do so. Because E-10 is 15 or 20 cents cheaper doesn't mean they have to buy it. If E-10 was so inferior (LIE) to E-0 why isn't E-0 selling where it's available then?

[Edited by: Hannie59 at 8/7/2013 3:42:39 PM EST]
Profile Pic
brerrabbitTX
Champion Author Houston

Posts:1,404
Points:24,925
Joined:Mar 2011
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2013 2:59:35 PM

Discussions like these are where the fuzzy math comes into play. Hannie, I understand you point about choice but your state is not a prime example. I am very familiar with gas sales at the wholesale level in Wisconsin and can tell you that I deal specifically with 8 terminals and am aware of the rest. I know what we sell there. I know that the 8 we deal with sell only e-10 blends with one exception. They sell a clear non ethanol blended premium only. That means no RIN credit so by default that product is 10 to 12 cents a gallon more expensive at the wholesale level. So the comparison you are making is customers can buy 87 e-10 which is cheapest, clear premium which is the most expensive, or e-85. The vast majority buy 87 e-10. So you are not really comparing apples to apples in your example.

The 75% want renewable fuel that is thrown around here so freely is really a red herring. The RFA or other such organization threw this number out there and try as I might I have been unable to get the actual questions they used in the survey. I don't care who you are big oil, the RFA, the government, whoever, if all you release is the results of the survey without the questions, and without methodology then you survey results are what comes out of the south end of a north bound cow.

Survey questions can be manipulated to produce any outcome you want. I took test and survey classes in college. Ask a question like if renewable fuels were priced less than current fuel prices are you in favor of renewable fuels? 75% say of course! That is not saying 75% of the people want renewable fuels that is saying they want it cheaper. That is two completely different things.
Profile Pic
darwinfinch
Veteran Author Gasbuddy

Posts:457
Points:6,860
Joined:May 2013
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2013 2:59:05 PM

"very few people choose the ethanol free"

It seems that even at the country's largest bike gathering, the Sturgis Motorcycle Rally, people are choosing ethanol. Interesting!
Profile Pic
darwinfinch
Veteran Author Gasbuddy

Posts:457
Points:6,860
Joined:May 2013
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2013 2:39:45 PM

"Shockjock continues to basically ignore reality."

Ha I noticed.
Profile Pic
Hannie59
All-Star Author Appleton

Posts:964
Points:24,300
Joined:Apr 2010
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2013 2:25:49 PM

Shockjock continues to basically ignore reality.

He claims people only use ethanol if they are forced to. He has made this lie time after sickening time. Yet, Every person in 80% of my state pulls up to the pump and has the choice to buy E-10, E-85, or gas labelled "ethanol free" pure gas. All those gallons of E-10 and E-85 being pumped into tanks and being run on mile after trouble free mile. And Shockjock says these paople are all forced to use ethanol. WRONG! They are CHOOSING it.

Guess what liar, very few people choose the ethanol free. Again , your claim is false.

[Edited by: Hannie59 at 8/7/2013 2:26:27 PM EST]
Profile Pic
darwinfinch
Veteran Author Gasbuddy

Posts:457
Points:6,860
Joined:May 2013
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2013 2:20:53 PM

You continue to miss the point that the RFS isn't forcing consumers, it's forcing oil companies to get out of the way, which is what consumers want. You never address Big Oil's role in suppressing innovation.

"you don't have to have a law forcing people to use a product if they are already willing too."

Yes you do, if another product holds a privileged monopoly over the marketplace.

"40%+ of the harvested corn was used to make ethanol last year"

This is the most basic ethanol myth out there and yet somehow you are not educated enough to correct it. 35-40% of corn was processed by biorefineries; over HALF of that was returned to the animal feed market as high quality distillers grains, meaning 16% of corn became fuel; the remainder became food and feed. Google "DDGS" to educate yourself. I somehow doubt you will stop reciting the "40% corn" line though.

"Ethanol has forced corn prices higher."

Corn prices are down, yet oil and food prices continue to rise. Also, food prices have the lowest inflation rate of almost any other item. The price increaes in food is UNDER national inflation rates. Hmmmmmmm. There are 11 cents of corn in Corn Flakes, etc. etc. PS - Tyson Foods and General Mills had record profits last quarter.Your pro-oil arguments are from the 1990s... outdated and inaccurate as ever.
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,737
Points:2,783,765
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2013 2:07:58 PM

"Drivers don't "choose" gasoline, they use it because choices are limited. 75% of Americans want renewable alternatives. 73% support the RFS."

Is there a shortage of ethanol? There are choices, and if people wanted to use ethanol, it's available and they would. That they have to be forced to use it speaks volumes...

"So the existence of the law implies that most people do not agree with it"

No, the existence of law implies that people don't want to use ethanol. After all you don't have to have a law forcing people to use a product if they are already willing too...
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,737
Points:2,783,765
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2013 2:04:07 PM

"The RFS is no monster. It isn't designed to slap consumers on the wrist"

The RFS IS a monster. It FORCES consumers to use a fuel they don't want. After all, if there were a demand for the product, there would be no need to force people to use it, would there?
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,737
Points:2,783,765
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2013 2:02:37 PM

"Only 14-16% of corn in the U.S. is processed into ethanol"

BS 40%+ of the harvested corn was used to make ethanol last year...

"By investing and advocating for agriculture, the biorefining industry has actually helped spur growth in rural economies, seed technology, and yields. Crop numbers are up, THANKS to ethanol, not in spite of it"

Yep, we are using planting and using more Frakenfoods to keep up, as well as utilizing marginal lands, which requires increased use of fertilizers and pesticides and also results in increased erosion and run-off...

" There is currently a corn surplus."

For one reason.. Ethanol has forced corn prices higher. Higher corn prices decrease demand and force up food prices...

" Corn used for biorefining is #2 field corn, not sweet corn (the kind we eat)."

Sorry, Humans and animals both eat field corn... Plus land devoted to energy is land that cannot be devoted to growing food...

"As you already noted, cellulosic technology is here and growing"

The ethanol industry has been claiming that for 20+ years. They say this in order to get huge grants from the government. Typically the money disappears (leaving certain individuals much richer) and the company goes bankrupt without ever fulfilling the promise...
Profile Pic
darwinfinch
Veteran Author Gasbuddy

Posts:457
Points:6,860
Joined:May 2013
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2013 1:06:51 PM

"the controversy is over using corn"

Steveo, do any of the following facts resonate with your perception of ethanol?

- Only 14-16% of corn in the U.S. is processed into ethanol

- Biorefining ethanol outputs large quantities of high-protein distillers grain (what is left after the starch is removed). This is sold as high-quality animal feed and just this month passed soybeans to become the #1 feed for livestock in the U.S.

- By investing and advocating for agriculture, the biorefining industry has actually helped spur growth in rural economies, seed technology, and yields. Crop numbers are up, THANKS to ethanol, not in spite of it.

- There is currently a corn surplus. There is literally more corn than anyone knows what to do with it. Were it not for the ethanol industry, these farmers would be producing at a loss.

- Corn used for biorefining is #2 field corn, not sweet corn (the kind we eat).

- As you already noted, cellulosic technology is here and growing, thanks to the 1st generation corn ethanol industry.
Profile Pic
Steveo763
Veteran Author Twin Cities

Posts:306
Points:106,265
Joined:Jul 2013
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2013 12:58:38 PM

I think ethanol is mandated because Oil companies wouldn't use it if they didn't have to. They could use 100% and that would mean more consumption of oil, which would mean more volume of product moved and higher profits. A forced ethanol mandate is great, the controversy is over using corn(technically food, because it is a feed source for animals, and meat becomes more expensive because of this) I don't think many would contest ethanol if it came from switchgrass, or some other vegetation sources... Except those with stock holdings in petroleum products, with much to gain. I am sure my mutual funds have holdings in Oil, but I'm all for renewables, although many in my opinion are simply a transition to the next big energy source.
Profile Pic
darwinfinch
Veteran Author Gasbuddy

Posts:457
Points:6,860
Joined:May 2013
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2013 12:11:11 PM

"Unlike ethanol, people choose to use gasoline..."

Drivers don't "choose" gasoline, they use it because choices are limited. 75% of Americans want renewable alternatives. 73% support the RFS.

"If 75% of Americans wanted ethanol, the government wouldn't have to have laws forcing people to use it..."

So the existence of the law implies that most people do not agree with it? Can we also infer that because rape is illegal, most people are inherent rapists?

The RFS is no monster. It isn't designed to slap consumers on the wrist. It uses government power to advocate for the 75% of Americans who want to slap Big Oil on the wrist, and it wisely does so by cordoning off economic breathing room in which alternatives can be seeded and grown-- an area which would otherwise be trampled by the bully monopoly of Big Oil.

[Edited by: darwinfinch at 8/7/2013 12:12:39 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,737
Points:2,783,765
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2013 11:21:41 AM

"Why would you mandate the use of gasoline?"

They don't mandate it because they don't have to. Unlike ethanol, people choose to use gasoline...
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,737
Points:2,783,765
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2013 11:20:38 AM

"unlike ethanol, which 75% of Americans want"

I'm still waiting for you to provide the study which shows this...

Here is a simple fact. If 75% of Americans wanted ethanol, the government wouldn't have to have laws forcing people to use it...

[Edited by: Shockjock1961 at 8/7/2013 11:23:01 AM EST]
Profile Pic
Primepower
All-Star Author Washington

Posts:577
Points:327,085
Joined:Jun 2013
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2013 10:59:36 AM

gamechanger
Profile Pic
Hubba2107
Champion Author Iowa

Posts:2,590
Points:664,185
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2013 10:44:26 AM

Time to end the tax breaks or at least scale them back
Profile Pic
forresj
Champion Author Wilmington

Posts:6,000
Points:1,127,485
Joined:May 2005
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2013 10:04:20 AM

Big Oil Companies don't need anymore "handouts" from the U.S. taxpayers.
Profile Pic
33gort33
Champion Author Indiana

Posts:1,614
Points:667,310
Joined:Mar 2012
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2013 8:41:38 AM

don't have an easy answer for this, sadly
Profile Pic
darwinfinch
Veteran Author Gasbuddy

Posts:457
Points:6,860
Joined:May 2013
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2013 8:41:01 AM

Why would you mandate the use of gasoline? Most people hate the stuff and the irresponsible vampires who fracksuck it out of the ground. Gasoline is expensive, hard to find, impossible to grow, and bad for the environment... unlike ethanol, which 75% of Americans want.
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,737
Points:2,783,765
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2013 7:07:31 AM

I don't see Congress mandating the amount of gasoline that must be sold every year, unlike ethanol....
Profile Pic
Floridaman2013
Champion Author Florida

Posts:2,379
Points:495,045
Joined:May 2013
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2013 6:50:30 AM

During the last election, the President has repeatedly called for an end to the oil company tax breaks and supplements but Congress rejected every bill as they have since 2010. The lobbyist's for big oil have deep pockets.
Profile Pic
gamechanger2011
Champion Author Wichita

Posts:1,894
Points:72,590
Joined:Jun 2011
Message Posted: Aug 6, 2013 10:29:42 PM

Interesting debate today. I was out of town and missed it all. Darwinfinch....your posts are right along with my thinking! We need to be working on solutions NOW and not waiting until it's too late. We truly feel a sense of urgency to avoid a looming catastrophe, that many on here refuse to acknowledge. Thank goodness for the pioneers and the visionaries! We all can be doing our part to help make this change.
Profile Pic
brerrabbitTX
Champion Author Houston

Posts:1,404
Points:24,925
Joined:Mar 2011
Message Posted: Aug 6, 2013 5:19:19 PM

"Strange that they should continually run into a wall of resistance in doing so. Big Oil's plan for the future: "Let's just finish up the oil and then start thinking about what's next." Really? Then why did by volume every gallon of fuel sold in the US last year have the equivilant of 9.6% ethanol in it?

Who do you think put all the ethanol into the gas? Hint, it was not the ethanol producers, it was those nasty old oil companies.
Profile Pic
darwinfinch
Veteran Author Gasbuddy

Posts:457
Points:6,860
Joined:May 2013
Message Posted: Aug 6, 2013 5:04:25 PM

Your "gas ceases to exist" scenario rightly concludes that a sudden transition to any energy alternative would be ridiculous and impractical. Thanks for agreeing.

This is why supporters of renewable fuel want to innovate NOW.

Strange that they should continually run into a wall of resistance in doing so. Big Oil's plan for the future: "Let's just finish up the oil and then start thinking about what's next."
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,284
Points:1,330,280
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Aug 6, 2013 4:54:15 PM

Happy 100th anniversary to oil tax subsidies, long-lived Big Oil welfare.
Profile Pic
brerrabbitTX
Champion Author Houston

Posts:1,404
Points:24,925
Joined:Mar 2011
Message Posted: Aug 6, 2013 4:52:39 PM

"Outrageous, since you could never make anywhere near enough ethanol to supply the demand... "

You totally left out the magically part.... Of course there is not enough ethanol to do this, that was not the point of the example.

Try calculating this, gas ceases to exsist tomorrow and the only motor fuel is availble is ethanol. Every car, truck, machine, train, boat, ship, manufacturing process, chemical, and every other thing that uses petroleum products today can magically use ethanol tomorrow.
Profile Pic
brerrabbitTX
Champion Author Houston

Posts:1,404
Points:24,925
Joined:Mar 2011
Message Posted: Aug 6, 2013 4:49:58 PM

Since when is return on capital not a lot more than profit.

In the simplest terms would you rather invest you hard earned money in a CD that returned 2% or a CD that returned 20%? In investments and financial anlysis you start with a limited resource, money! You then decide on the best way to invest it and look for projects with higher returns. Oil companies are not currently where you would put a lot of money.
Profile Pic
Hannie59
All-Star Author Appleton

Posts:964
Points:24,300
Joined:Apr 2010
Message Posted: Aug 6, 2013 3:16:57 PM

Shocky's favorite board game ---> Monopoly
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,737
Points:2,783,765
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Aug 6, 2013 2:27:14 PM

"Every car, truck, machine, train, boat, ship, manufacturing process, chemical, and every other thing that uses petroleum products today can magically use ethanol tomorrow. How much do you think the ethanol industries profits would be?"

Outrageous, since you could never make anywhere near enough ethanol to supply the demand...
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,737
Points:2,783,765
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Aug 6, 2013 2:24:43 PM

"There is nothing wrong with a company making a profit in the United States. In fact, it's necessary. That's how we stay in business. It is also true that the more dollars that are exchanged, the larger that profit picture will be."

Amen!
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,737
Points:2,783,765
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Aug 6, 2013 2:23:36 PM

"Shocky thinks questioning the Big Oil privilege gap is LOL-worthy"

No, I think someone who complains about oil companies while making a living selling their product is LOL-worthy!
Profile Pic
Hannie59
All-Star Author Appleton

Posts:964
Points:24,300
Joined:Apr 2010
Message Posted: Aug 6, 2013 2:13:21 PM

brerrabbit,

There is alot more to the profits then return on capital! They are a monopoly! A monopoly is indefensible under any circumstances. And to top it off, they lie. You KNOW they do it and you know why. THEY are the ones who want no part of competition, and have no regards for anything. A century of ruining ground water, ocean water, clean air. But big oil is so arrogant that they still want free reign to control this nation's economy without any "interference" from some damn farmers who have a great product that helps in alot of ways with the above mentioned evils. And nothing matters but the lies to them. Nothing matters but the false perception that petroleum based fuels are tho only way to go, ever.

They are wrong and immoral to do business in that manner.


[Edited by: Hannie59 at 8/6/2013 2:18:31 PM EST]
Post a reply Back to Topics