To the Editor:

In its editorial page on National View “End costly ethanol subsidies,” the article failed to provide its readers any context, mislead them about the nature of U.S. ethanol production and offered no alternative to replace America’s addiction to oil. The amount of ethanol produced nationally last year was about equal to the amount of oil this country imported from Saudi Arabia. A study by Merrill Lynch cites that gasoline would be about $35 cents more without ethanol as a product in the motor fuel supply.

First, calling for an end to tax credits for ethanol while ignoring the billions of PERMANENT tax subsidies for Big Oil (the World Bank cites $500 billion last year) is as inequitable as it is shortsighted. Despite all members of Congress wanting more renewable energy technologies, they come before Congress with hat in hand for high risk investment. The oil industry, by comparison, only lobbies when the permanent subsidies it enjoys are threatened.

Second, American ethanol is a success story. Only lamenting the value of the tax credit for ethanol without discussing the economic benefits ethanol is misleading. For example, federal tax revenue generated by the production of ethanol and use of ethanol totaled more than $8 billion in 2009, $3 billion more than the value of the tax credit. Jobs and economic opportunity delivered to hundreds of rural communities further add to the value of investment in domestic ethanol production.

Third, the article suggests there are better technologies available without providing any evidence. There is no gasoline alternative technology that can match ethanol’s availability, production volume, or oil displacement benefits. Moreover, continued investment in ethanol is required to ensure promising next generation biofuel technologies, such as cellulosic ethanol for commercialization. Ending investment in ethanol will result in more oil consumption and severely curtail investment in new renewable fuel technologies.

Accordingly, this is a question of priorities. If the goal of assumption of the article is a level energy playing field, then it should call for the elimination of all tax provisions benefitting every energy industry – oil, natural gas, coal, nuclear, wind, solar, etc. Finally, if the real priority is ending our addiction to oil, then eliminating the permanent tax breaks for Big Oil and investing those dollars in renewable fuel technologies should be our goal.

Bob Sather
Wisconsin Bio Industry Alliance
11010 161st Street
Chippewa Falls, WI 54729

It’s part of an ambitious goal by SL’s owner, the Stockholm County Council, to use renewable fuels in at least 50 percent of all passenger transport by 2012.  They’re already well on their way to hitting their target, having reached nearly 30 percent already.

Stockholm is setting an excellent example for the rest of the world.  They are aiming big, and following through.  Their efforts show the rest of us that it can be done.

As the EPA stalls to increase the ethanol blend rate, other countries are advancing green technologies and reducing their carbon footprint. It’s time the U.S. pushes forward with the same dedication that has been shown in Stockholm.

For more information about the grant, visit the Grants.gov website.

To learn more about biomass, you can download fact sheets from our Bio Power page.

The report, published by the Coordinating Research Council (CRC), was due to test 16 engines manufactured between 2001 and 2009, but has only conducted testing on half thus far.  In fact, testing has only been completed for four engines.

It is troublesome that the auto industry is drawing conclusions from a study that is nowhere near finished when other third party research, and even the EPA, has suggested that E15 is safe for recent engine models.

CEO of Growth Energy, Tom Buis, said, “The EPA has told us in writing that they intend to complete their testing on E15 before making a decision, and we are confident they will.”

Why hasn’t the auto industry done the same?

Buis added, “We are also confident that the testing will show what we already know: that E15 can run just fine in today’s modern engines, all while creating good paying jobs here in America.”

For more details about the situation, check out this story at BrighterEnergy.org.

- A 45-cent-per-gallon Volumetric Ethanol Excise Tax Credit (VEETC)
- A 54-cent-per-gallon ethanol tariff
- A cellulosic ethanol tax credit
- A small producers tax credit

We are asking everyone’s help by making a call to your Congressional Representative and sending a letter asking for their support of this important bill.  It is critical to gain their support now for a bill that will have such an impact on the bio industry in Wisconsin.

Without extension, these tax credits will expire at the end of this year, causing an immediate spike in fuel costs.  Without the VEETC credit, for example, taxpayers will see an increase of $5.4 billion in taxes at the fuel pump, an oppressive amount in this difficult economy.

A GAO study found that since 1968 the oil industry has received more than $150 million in tax breaks, subsidies and incentives.  Support for ethanol has amounted to less than a tenth of that total.  Why wouldn’t we spend just as much on a source of fuel that reduces our dependency on foreign oil and increases our nation’s energy security?

Please contact your Congressional Representative in support of the bill today.

You may download talking points, a fact sheet and a sample letter below.

VEETC Key Findings from RFA

White Paper Talking Points on VEETC

Sample Letter on VTEEC

In order to have the most beneficial contact with your Congressional representative, the following is a listing of where they currently stand on the issue:

Congresswoman Baldwin – Possible Support

Congressman Kagen- Undecided

Congressman King – Undecided

Congresswoman Moore – Undecided

Congressman Obey – Undecided

Congressman Petri – Undecided

Congressman Ryan – Undecided

Congressman Sensenbrenner – Opposed

We greatly appreciate all of your support in this cause and your help in moving Wisconsin’s bio industry forward.

Some small engine manufacturers, however, have expressed concerns about the bill.  As a strong supporter of small engine manufacturers and users, the WBIA has worked to highlight how the proposed bill will actually protect jobs and benefit the small engine industry.

Here are a few ways in which the bill will protect small engine manufacturers:

1.  The bill guarantees the availability of ethanol-free gasoline.

2.  The bill ensures small engine users will be able to buy gasoline with ethanol blends recommended by the manufacturer.

3.  The bill protects small engine owners, should ethanol become to expensive or scarce.

For more details, including text from the bill, download our fact sheet below.

Small Engine fact sheet [PDF]

According to the EPA, the Renewable Fuel Standard will reduce “greenhouse-gas emissions by up to 13.1 million metric tons annually by 2012” which will be equal to having 2.3 million less cars on the road. For more information, visit: http://www.epa.gov/oms/renewablefuels/index.htm

To learn more about the status of ethanol in our fuel supply and see the effects this waiver would have on our economy, please check out the “Green Jobs Waiver Fact Sheet” by clicking here.

We now this not to be true and we need to make sure that our elected representatives in Washington here from us. Representative Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (D-SD) and Representative John Shimkus (R-IL) have written a letter to the Environmental Protection Agency asking them to deny the request from Texas waiving the RFS. If the EPA were to grant this request, it could have serious repercussions here in Wisconsin.

We need to contact our legislators and ask them to co-sign the Herseth Sandlin-Shimkus letter in support of the Renewable Fuels Standard. You can call the U.S. Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121 and ask for your representative’s office.  Just tell your representative you want them to sign the Herseth Sandlin-Shimkus letter. Remember, every voice helps!