You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: Culture Wars
Democrat Ag Chairman "will not support any kind of climate change bill"
2009-05-06
From subscription newsletter; link goes to Peterson's gummint website
House Agriculture Chairman Collin Peterson said today that he won't support pending House climate legislation because he has lost faith in U.S EPA for its handling of proposed biofuels regulations.
The rest of us have lost faith, period - but it's a place to start...
"I will not support any kind of climate change bill," the Minnesota Democrat said at a hearing on the biofuels proposal with EPA and Agriculture Department officials. "I don't care. Even if you fix this. I don't trust anybody anymore."
Welcome to our world, Mr. Peterson.
Peterson said later that he would support a climate bill only if it were "ironclad" and detailed enough to keep EPA from writing implementing rules. But he added that he was unsure this was possible.
It ain't, honey, but I'm sure your compatriots will promise you a LOT to get on board....
At issue: EPA draft rules for implementing the expanded renewable fuels standard that includes measurement of biofuels' greenhouse gas emissions. The rules include measurement of emissions from "indirect" land-use changes associated with biofuels -- an aspect Peterson and other ethanol defenders decry as unfair and unready for adoption.
Whatever it takes to stop the Climate Bill Congress's latest plan to fleece the voters rubes.
The draft rules conclude, depending on the time frames modeled, that traditional corn ethanol could have slightly more "lifecycle" emissions than gasoline when these land-use changes are factored in.

Peterson told reporters he was suggesting to Democrats from other ethanol states that they also not support the House climate bill.
Get 'em all on board, sir!
"By the time it gets down to the agency, what the hell is going to come out of it?" he said. "This thing is out of control."
You're just now noticing? Oy.
Peterson said at the hearing, "You are going to kill off the biofuels industry before it gets started." Later, he told reporters: "If they think anyone is going to invest in next-generation ethanol, given what's going on, they are kidding themselves."
At least we know whose ox is getting gored here. Sucks to be a Dem, eh, Collin?
Posted by:Barbara Skolaut

#6  "you all need to go on a diet anyway"

/Teleprompter Jesus
Posted by: Frank G   2009-05-06 18:58  

#5  Sounds right on the money, AzCat. :-(
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut   2009-05-06 18:11  

#4  Besoaker - The big corporate ag guys are way bigger than 800-1000 acres, at least on average and worse land. Cash flows & equipment costs dictate a larger operation than that for those who want to own their own equipment these days.

It's the big guys who'll survive and benefit as costs are escalated. Maybe Obama really doesn't understand that but I suspect that he does: millions of small business owners with stakes in the country are an unruly mob that's difficult to control; centralize those small businesses into far fewer and far larger ones with only a handful of people deriving the lion's share of the benefit and the problem of government control becomes orders of magnitude easier. To me it seems that he's following a classic economic fascist model in order to leave the federal government in sole control of an allegedly "private" sector but then I'm not an economic historian so I might well be off base in that thinking.
Posted by: AzCat   2009-05-06 16:53  

#3  Barry is aware of all this Azcat. He's tarketing the big Corporate Ag, guys who work 800-1000 acres or more...the $250k per year and above crowd. Never mind the fact the smaller operators will go under first. Gotta break a few eggs, etc. Level the playing field, redistribute the land and so on.
Posted by: Besoeker   2009-05-06 15:37  

#2  An interesting aspect of carbon taxes / regulation that I've not seen addressed is the impact it will have on food prices and the global food supply. US farmers produce a significant fraction of the world's grain and many US farmers (particularly those whose lands are in the bottom couple of quintiles on the productivity scale) are having a tough time hanging on. Carbon taxes will have outsized effects on fertilizer costs which will drive grain farmers on less productive lands out of the industry as their land simply won't be able to produce enough to absorb the additional imposed costs. We'll see an outsized spike in grain prices as a result before things settle in at a new equilibrium but that point will certainly see the world food supply reduced.
Posted by: AzCat   2009-05-06 15:31  

#1  measurement of bio fuels' greenhouse gas emissions

Ummm, I thought the current "Eco Speak" was "No emissions since it's a renewable fuel (Yes I know it's gobbledygook)
Posted by: Redneck Jim   2009-05-06 15:02  

00:00